Hon. Mark A. Juhas See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.1 - 10 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   2.0 - 6 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. Mark A. Juhas


Comments


Litigant

Comment #: CA8834
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Unbelievable !
At the time I posted my comment two days ago there were total of 21 comments. Today I see 18 comments. Is there censor to decide what can be in published on comments and what can not???
My comment was deleted!
Mark Juhas is corrupt absolutely.

Family law court is a court of equity. (In re Marriage of Egedi (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 17, 22-23, 105 Cal.Rptr.2d 518.) Those who seek equity, must do equity and have “clean hands.” (Keith G. v. Suzanne H. (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 853, 862, 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 525.) Judge Juhas support whose who do not have "clean hands"
“Those who interfere with the truth-seeking function of the trial court strike at the very heart of the justice system. The courts will not tolerate such interference”. (In Re Marriage of Chakko, 8 Cal. Rptr. 3d 699 (Cal. Ct. App. 2004)

The trial court's exercise of discretion must be guided, however, by fixed legal principles, and must "be exercised in conformity with the spirit of the law and in a manner to subserve and not to impede or defeat the ends of substantial justice." (Bailey v. Taaffe (1866) 29 Cal. 422, 424.)

Trial Court doesn’t have discretion to ignore the statutory provision (Bemis v. Bemis, 89 Cal.App.2d 80, 200 P.2d84, Cal.App. 2 Dist, December 08, 1948 (NO CIV. 16278)

They call Family Court, Court of Liars. Mark Juhas is one of those who support and rules in the favor of liars. I have records to support my statement.

Joint me for filing claims with Justice System Integrity Division, California Commission for Judiciary performance, California State Bar Association.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8830
Rating:1.8
Comments:
Must be on the take because anyone who makes such consistent biased and destructive rulings can't be that stupid by accident.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8829
Rating:1.0
Comments:
He could not have been worse. He ignored the facts, the law, made up his own facts (often with no evidence presented by either side), made up or ignored the law, and persisted even after the mistakes in his tentative rulings were pointed out with the correct applicable law and/or facts given to him. His own rulings were often contradictory between his rulings, but he refused to do anything to fix his bizarre and baseless rulings. And, he did this many times.

All of his "mistakes" favored one side. He acted like he was paid to favor one side.

Litigant

Comment #: CA8828
Rating:1.0
Comments:
On your scale of 1 to 10, 10 being best, I would give Juhas a minus 100.

He ignored the facts, the law, contradicted his own rulings and every error favored one litigant, and stole millions from the other, me.

If he was not bought, he missed a great opportunity, as the other side would have paid him millions for all of the rulings that he made which favored them, and contrary to the facts and law.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7798
Rating:3.0
Comments:
Okay, something is wrong with him. He's either on the take or just hates his job. The 7 times I have been in front of him for long cause trials he has never read the actual exhibits or evidence. Makes things up as he goes along. Says one thing one day then a 180 declaration of what he's going to do the next. If you are a real victim of domestic abuse, do not stipulate to this judge. He will abuse you further, he has zero patience for victims and will take your children from you in a snap. He will make orders that are so freaking vague you are forced to keep coming back to court for understanding, making your conflict situation worse until he's so sick of you wanting help you will lose legal custody as punishment for trying to work with your ex and get resolution. He's lost his judicial mind. He cannot be trusted to really try your case in a fair and unbiased manner. And forget it if the other side has high priced attorneys, they will win hands down every time, even if they present zero evidence, you can count on it. Forget it if you're a single mother fighting for your kids, you've lost points just for gender and relationship status.

Other

Comment #: CA7741
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
the ruling he gave was nothing than being bias and insanity. He should be disqualified and I would make sure i would make it happen. i will add more later

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7406
Rating:1.3
Comments:
Ignored mountains of evidence, excluding some evidence,

Made up evidence never entered by either party to get to a ruling the judge wanted.

Called me a criminal for having an ERISA pension fund, by his own admission he did not understand anything about ERISA pensions in general or this one in particular. Refused to learn, but entered many opinions and judgments on issues in this area where he was not qualified, because ERISA is federal court only, inadditon to his total ignorance and biases.

All his "errors" favored the other side.

Millions at stake, and he refused to try to understand the most basic issues or apply the most basic laws on evidence production, allowing other side to never produce a single financial document while they stole and were hiding millions previously stolen
etc, in kind over and over.

IF he was not paid, he should have asked for a large bribe, as the other side would have paid him millions for his "errors" which favored them, as his "erroors' were worth 10s of millions to them.

Other

Comment #: CA7354
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Superior Court Judge Mark Juhas ruled Thursday that the "Melrose Place" and "Gossip Girl" star does not have strong enough ties to Los Angeles for him to make new rulings in her case.

But does Judge Mark Juhas have any ties to a soul and a consciousness?

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6527
Rating:10.0
Comments:
I am a civil litigator who is waiting for Judge Juhas' decision on a matter he took under submission earlier today. Even though my client and I both fear that His Honor's decision is going to go against us; the only reason I gave His Honor 10s across the board is because the system would not allow a higher rating. Judge Juhas is firm, decisive, respectful, smart AND wise; cared about the case, and although he has multiple other matters being tried in his courtroom he knew and understood our case inside and out. Judge Juhas is what every other judge should be striving to be...and that is coming from an attorney who thinks he likely lost.

Other

Comment #: CA5983
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Rules in the child's best interest

He is an advocate for the child

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5042
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge is satan in human flesh. He does not follow any of the laws that our forefathers put in place for the courtroom to follow. He makes up his own laws that suit whoever paid him off. He is easily bought. He's rude, disrespectful and biased. The only way Mark Juhas became a judge is through corruption.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5029
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Juhas is more concerned about his future as a "Rent-a-judge than the law. He has so often
Ruled in favor of the attorneys that can hire him in the future, it has become an abuse of the justice system.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA4316
Rating:1.1
Comments:
Judge Juhas is partial and biased. He completely lacks impartiality and any sence of equity. Justice is certainly not blind in his court room. His inconsistent and illogical rulings cause great expense and delay. Judge Juhas has no business interpreting the law, as he seems to ignore it at his leisure. All Judge Juhas decisions should be overturned!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3870
Rating:1.2
Comments:
I've had so many victims of domestic violence call needing help from being beat up and bullied by this judge. When the victim has no lawyer they are doomed in this judge's courtroom. He has had on more than one occasion made inexplicable rulings that fly in the face of all facts before him.

Other

Comment #: CA3318
Rating:1.0
Comments:
The judge hardly ever seemed to read any of the documents before him in my divorce trial. He instead would get angry about the time it was taking...however the case was continually continued because if his schedule. Additionally, the other side was playing a lot of games, which would have been easy to see if he would read any paperwork, but he didn't, instead chastising both sides. Additionally, his final judgment was extremely difficult to interpret and he didn't even both to give dollar amounts, further prolonging the process a my ex is now arguing about how Hoa judge can be interpreted. It was also extremely rare that he followed any judicial procedures, including allowing my ex to flagrantly disregard the ATROs.

Litigant

Comment #: CA1559
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I can’t say enough about some judges in the Los Angeles court system. Zakon, Shaller, Friedenthal, Steinberg, Loomis, Stevens and others. I asked your friend Juhas many times to recuse himself from my case and he refused. The friction started when I discovered, by an accidental admission by my ex, that my 14-year old daughter has not had a facial reconstruction surgery which is 3 years late. Zeidler from the dependency court in Monterey Park, had rubber stamped DCFS’s desires by giving full legal and physical custody to my ex. I requested from Juhas to allow me to take part in the medical decision making of my daughter, since I am the one required to provide her medical insurance, I am responsible for half of her unpaid medical bills and that my ex, had not been responsible and diligent enough to take up the care. I cited extraordinary circumstances, which I believed were justifiable for him to act on my request. He denied my motion. Since I am disabled and I had been receiving disability payments of $ 2,000, of which, $1,500. Were taken away for alimony and child support, I brought several OSCs hoping to modify the support. After approximately a year and a half, the matter bounced between Commonwealth and Hill street courts until Juhas heard it. Knowing that I had a two year-old child from my new marriage and knowing that my knew wife is an undocumented alien, unable to work, Juhas disregarded my argument to terminate spousal support in its 6th year, from an 8 and ½ year marriage. He denied the motion under the pretext that as long as my, college educated, physically and mental capable ex, is carrying for our 14-year old child, it would be a hardship for him to terminate the spousal support of $570.00, which is into it s 7th year. He refused to consider evidence showing my new family living in a leaking trailer, surviving on $800 per month. The matter has been appealed, I had filled a writ to have him removed from my case, I had written a compliant to judge Steinberg to no avail and I am still waiting for a decision from the Commission on Judicial Performance, the decision on the writ and the process of the appeal is on-going. I forgot to mention that he had denied to motions 170.1 through 170.6 and I had filled a new OSC to modify, which is scheduled to be heard on September 6th, 2011. You can follow the case on Dmini vs. Dmini, PD038219.

Other

Comment #: CA1558
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He is not very bright....

Other

Comment #: CA1427
Rating:1.0
Comments:
egotist. wants to show others that he is the boss. loose on judicial procedures. obviously unfair to even the the viewing public.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1401
Rating:10.0
Comments:
I've been practicing family law in L.A. County for over 20 years. Family law judges come and go (mostly go because it is the toughest assignment in the entire system). We've had some great judges and not-so-great judges. Judge Juhas is one of the all time greats. Fair, ethical, hard-working, and very smart. When I'm lucky enough to draw him I know the outcome will be the best decision for the litigants.