Hon. Cary H. Nishimoto See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.6 - 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. Cary H. Nishimoto


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3305
Rating:2.5
Comments:
Refused to take five minutes of testimony on an ex parte matter that would have resolved a jurisdictional issue. Either did not understand the law or was too lazy to read 12 pages of pleadings (which included the App for a TRO, P & A's and Declarations). Incredibly lazy. We still have time for a 170.6.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2652
Rating:1.6
Comments:
He is extremely biased, doesn't believe he is required to follow the law and is arrogant. He is an automatic 170.6, as far as I am concerned.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2321
Rating:7.3
Comments:
Generally speaking I'd rather be assigned to his courtroom than any other courtroom in the Southwest District. He has run a general jurisdiction courtroom for many years now and knows what he's doing. He's polite and respectful to counsel. I've won and lost before him, maybe had rulings I didn't agree with, or thought should have gone my way, but that happens in any courtroom.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2314
Rating:1.9
Comments:
He requires that you serve your ex parte papers on the opposing party no later than 10:00 a.m. the day prior. Last I checked you only had to give notice by that deadline but this judge requires that you serve your papers by that time as well. Obviously this creates a problem and basically destroys the purpose of ex parte procedure. Section 170.6 was made for judges like this.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2286
Rating:1.8
Comments:
Very lazy and will just ignore the law if he's too busy to deal with your motion. Disrespectful, arrogant and unpredictable. Everything you don't want it a judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2253
Rating:3.4
Comments:
A little man in every sense, he easily carries his stature into the court room. Inappropriate remarks from him as if he is doing stand up comedy for his clerk and reporter. They weren't laughing nor were the plaintiff and defendant. Was Napoleon French?

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2150
Rating:6.6
Comments:
Not the smartest judge out there but he does try and does read paperwork. He tries to be fair and is polite and courteous. He has very limited trial hours which can make trials take a long time. He will not allow an argumentative or leading question, even on cross. Won't admit docs that have not come in via subpoena so be sure to do that before trial. He can be a bit dry, but once in awhile he cracks a joke. He is very nice to jurors.