Hon. Christine W. Byrd See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.7 - 7 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 13 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. Christine W. Byrd


Comments


Litigant

Comment #: CA31335
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
--I find it very curious that the RR monitors seem to protect, one group of LA county judges----[Redacted by Ed.] among some others) - when the RR arguably has, thousands and thousands, of judges, in well over 3000 counties, within the US and Puerto Rico, and yet to focus on an seem to protect judges, the same set if LA county judges---[Redacted by Ed.] circle.

--Yet, sometimes, there have been highly racist, misogynistic comments, full of offensive and curse words, left up for way too long, on certain other judges.

Are the RR monitors that naive, not to consider the truth to the comments? Or so naive, not to consider, what is making, these judges and lawyers, so nervous?


Why i--[Redacted by Ed.] so nervous, about the truth, if they had done, nothing wrong-??? Haven't the Rr monitors , even considered this?

---Why are they (--[Redacted by Ed.] so afraid, of the truth being posted, by those they victimized? Why do the RR monitors, appear to go out of their way, to protect this one particular group?

----[Redacted by Ed.]

---Christina Byrd, was in CCW Dept 315 and D--[Redacted by Ed.]

--Byrd repeatedly demeaned, disparaged me-- a self-represented litigant--while I have PTSD from all of the abuse--and this unbalanced judge mocks me--instead of her own conduct and my that of my rage driven, ex. who beat the sh*t out of me?

--When I brought up my ex's, gender animus, racism and anti -Semitic tropes , such as my ex. saying "Cheap J**..." among other things-- Judge Byrd and my ex. both smiled- (it was stunning and offensive )---he didn't even try to deny his anti-Semitic tropes, as Byrd and my ex.-- both smiled, when I brought up, that he he said, "Cheap J**..." Yet, the Gould-Saltmans' seemed to have sold their souls, to cozy and partner up, with Judge Byrd.

--[Redacted by Ed.]

*Can't make this up.

--[Redacted by Ed.]

--

Litigant

Comment #: CA31211
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
CA31210
*transfered

Litigant

Comment #: CA31210
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Christina Byrd was in CCW Dept 315 and Dianna Gould-Saltman was in CCW Dept. 316, when Trent Lewis (stunningly) tranfered my Restraining Order request hearing, from Stanley Mosk to CCW Byrd-315--stunning many reasonable people.

[Redacted by Ed.]
--She repeatedly demeaned, disparaged me-- a self-representted litigant--[Redacted by Ed.]

--This judge claims to have "never read the papers"-mocked my emotional/mental state--(as I was self-represented)-going against my highly represented, violent, connected , white, male abusive ex.

--I do have PTSD from all of the abuse---(and the fact that a judge would mock a self-represented litigant)--whose mental state she had mocked--is reprehensible.

From Byrd's own argument--I should have had representation (paid by my ex.)--because I was obviously too vulnerable to be representing myself--against an ex. -who had repeatedly committed perjury--then finally admitted to numerous violent acts (after tangled up--and after witness testimony.)---

[Redacted by Ed.]Very curious, her dept.

--In my opinion, even court staff looked stunned by some of Judge Byrd's comments, rulings and things that were said, by Judge Byrd, my ex. and even his lawyer)..

Litigant

Comment #: CA31185
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Comment #: CA31175

--Incredibly easy to read between the lines. Everyone reasonable knows how improperly, inappropriately, this judge conducts herself.

--Judge Christine Byrd, seems to take pleasure in making very serious disparaging, personal, ad hominem, pejorative attacks, against female, pro per litigants; beside all of her questionable, biases, pre-determined rulings-outcomes (while claiming that she never read the papers beforehand) , female gender animus, cronyism, among other things.

--She went out of her way, to protect a documented, violent, male abuser, who finally admitted numerous physical assaults, after numerous perjured denials; but his attorney has connected lawyers, who were cozy with her.

--What is very troubling, among many things, is why wouldn't she read the papers beforehand and who did she therefore, improperly speak to, ex parte, beforehand, to have such prejudicial, biased opinions?

--Christine Byrd is far from being an impartial and disinterested judge, on cases which her cronies, the connected, are involved on her pre-determined, favored side.

--Christine Byrd, improperly litigates from the bench and even quite improperly practices medicine, diagnosing litigants from the bench. Itis stunning. Again, this is also a judge , who stunningly claimed on record, that she "never read the papers"

Other

Comment #: CA31175
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
[Redacted by Ed.] How do these judicial thugs, even trust each other?

The thugs are NOT the private citizens, protesters on the streets, demanding equality, civil liberties,and justice,

The thugs ARE the [Redacted by Ed.] sitting on the bench, holding a bar card and Officers (redacted) of the Court, who call theirselves judges/lawyers--harming private cirizens for their own [redacted]

Litigant

Comment #: CA31173
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Comment #:31171

^Truth to Power!! Seattle mayor, Jenny Durkan, had no problem with the "Summer of Love," until protestors' came to her house.

---Once the protestors' came to Jenny Durkan's house, she put a halt to CHAZ/CHOP. My point --these very harmful, cowardly, lawless, judges and lawyers, don't think twice, about the harm they have caused vulnerable private citizens, along with violating their civil liberties, as long as someone does not do the same to them--the same does not happen to them.

--They would not be able to handle 1/1000, of what they have done to many of us and put us through. [Redacted by Ed.] Arguably, because they know how horrific and unlawful their conduct has been and comments just bring sunlight with all its ultraviolet rays, to their wrongdoings. Comments expose them for who they are--but many already know-have known for way too long.


---And, protests have been the result of systemic injustices, inequality, abuses of power and position , under the color of law, exactly the way this group of judges and lawyers, have been conducting themselve.

--[Redacted by Ed.]
--The conduct of these judges and lawyers, makes “Operation Casino Loyale"-look like child's play--because our due process rights and civil liberties, have been grossly violated and this group of judges and their lawyer connections, have put our lives and civil liberties, in imminent harm.

--They have also made, highly improper, personal attacks,against some of us, as if this makes them even appear one bit credible, ethical, honorable, or less guilty-quite the opposite.

[Redacted by Ed.]

---Our goal is simple--to obtain justice, to return the power to the people, to restore honest services, to the family courts, to hold complicit judges and lawyers, leadeship, accountable, with significant restitution, provided to their victims. Justice must be served.Plain and simple.

Other

Comment #: CA31171
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
31170

^ Notable and also significant, beside the fact that judges Christine Byrd, Dianna Gould-Saltman and Thomas Trent Lewis, were all appointed by Gov. Schwarzenegger, THOMAS TRENT LEWIS, was also assigned, to Long Cause Hearings at CCW.

In February 2015,Thomas Trent Lewis was also assigned at CENTRAL CIVIL WEST, Dept 309, Long Cause/OSC /Trials.

The Restraining Order case, with significant Conflicts of Interest, Prejudices, Biases, should never, under any circumstances, have been transfered to Christine Byrd's courtroom at CCW. Thomas Trent Lewis knows this and did this, anyway.

More importantly, he did this to a pro se, while the opposing side, was represented, with a highly connected lawyer(s), to all of these judges.

Thomas Trent Lewis knows this and tranfered this pro se litigant, anyway. Christine Byrd knows this and took the case, anyway.
[Redacted by Ed.]
Nothing about this, protected the litigant's constitutional rights , civil liberties, right to a fair hearing and trier of fact.

Litigant

Comment #: CA30916
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Christine Byrd is a friend of Dianna Gould-Saltman. Enough said. Not sure how either got on the bench. Clearly the judicial nomination evaluation commission (JNE) has problem vetting credible judges.

Litigant

Comment #: CA30894
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
----Dishonorable Christine Byrd (Dianna Gould-Saltman's partner in crime) does not conduct herself appropriately in the courtroom, to say the least.

--If you are pro per and the other ide has representation (or hired her colleague's attorney husband and his friends) you will never stand a chance.

--She will improperly litigate/legislate from the bench (acting like a defense attorney-fo the side that already has a connected attorney), improperly make make medical /clinical diagnoses from the bench) -even after she sated that she "never read the papers'---

She will alter the record --while significant portions of RT are removed (where she made highly improper comments)--as if she has told court reporter, it was "off the record"--

She will improperly demean, attempt to discredit and mock litignant --fi in pro per--and will go so over-board --her crimes and obstruction of cases and outcomes become abunantly obvious--(especialy when she is helping a colleagues layer husband)

They needed all of this illegal help, in pack mentality against a pro per?

---These "gang stalking" judges are just as bad as bad cops--as they harm others, destroy lives, stiop on civil liberties---and protect "their own"--but would likely throw each other under the bus--if the FBI came knocking at their doors.

--Even a court messenger was stunned by things she said, alowed in the courtroom and her rulings---

She clearly made her decision , before I entered the courtroom--and after apparent ex parte communications--with her parners in crime , Dianna Gould-Saltman and Trent Lewis, because Richard Gould-Saltman needed so much help and ran to his wife--and would not even leave case after my ex. hired his attorney friend (while as guilty judges and lawyers do--continued to cover tracks--but not very well)---

Other

Comment #: CA30891
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Review written on custody players.com

"If you don’t have a lawyer and your family law case is assigned to Byrd the first you thing you do is file "AFFIDAVIT OF PREJUDICE PREEMPTORY CHALLENGE TO JUDICIAL OFFICER" (Code Civ. Proc., §170.6), to get your case switched to another judge. The form can be found online and no reason is needed just sign the form and serve on other party and file proof of service......

Byrd's actions rise to the level of an abuse of discretion, as she now has made multiple ruling that are arbitrary and a unreasonable departure from precedent and settled judicial custom..............

Byrd gives specialized treatment to attorneys over In Pro Per litigants, failing to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. ...........

Byrd's actions equal a color of law violation while violating parent's civil rights and taking kids away from fathers based on her intuition as a white women who has never dealt with minority parents before taking the bench as she was a corporate lawyer before becoming a judge........

Byrd is fully aware of Family Code Section § 3025, that states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, access to records and information pertaining to a minor child, including but not limited to, medical, dental, mental health and school records, shall not be denied to a parent because that parent is not the child’s custodial parent.” ..............

However Byrd acts in defiance of common sense not making the information available to non-custodial parents or giving holidays schedules causing fathers to miss father's day with their children due to her ineptness...........

Byrd will continues to rule in bad faith abusing her judicial discretion since the family court has no oversight and appeals are too costly.............

Ever wonder why a father is not in a child's life, may not be his choice but the family courts or I mean Byrd's choice as she plays god on the bench ruining lives with the stroke of her pen.
by Community Supporters Fathers Civil Rights
on 01-25-2015 at 11-00-27............."

Other

Comment #: CA28742
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Approves court appointed attorney fees for services non rendered... Bias toward women litigants...seems to favor men...even if evidence is 100% valid

Other

Comment #: CA28268
Rating:1.0
Comments:
predjuice

Other

Comment #: CA27679
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Horrible judge and vindictive angry women. Is and never was attractive so despises women, don’t make the mistake of trusting her. Her husbands lead better things to do

Litigant

Comment #: CA16891
Rating:2.0
Comments:
Easily confused by men, she tends to favor people that lie with ease and ignores many facts presented by both sides. Fortunately for me, she doesn't seem to like women, so the accounting testimony submitted by a paid preparer got me a better judgement. Easy to manipulate if you are male.

Other

Comment #: CA14067
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Byrd is extremely biased and favorable to those who "appear" to be more affluent and is more likely to bend their way to help them out and protect THEIR assets regardless of facts showing they are lying and manipulating the system in order to protect their financial assets instead of providing security for their children. She was extremely and overtly favorable towards my ex (respondent) due to his career in law enforcement. In spite of our minor children reporting and testifying to the abuse they have endured from him and their statements that they are in fear of him and do not wish to have visitation with their father, she completely disregarded all of that and said the kids are too young and immature to know how they feel and what they truly want and when they're older they will thank her for helping them realize that they will benefit from having both parents involved in their lives. My children cried hysterically when they found out they were going to be forced to comply with the custody visitation order. They are terrified and will continue to be tormented and abused because Judge Byrd failed to protect them.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA13282
Rating:10.0
Comments:
I found Judge Byrd to remain open minded throughout the duration of our trial. She allowed for each side to speak without any indication of bias or favor. It was not until following the entire trial that her judgement was clear. I was astounded by her insightful and intuitive assessment of her findings. She was thoughtful in her articulation of her perception and showed compassion for all involved. I feel extremely grateful to have had my case ruled by Judge Byrd.

Other

Comment #: CA12508
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She has no clue about how to view the evidence. BIASED out of the gate.

Litigant

Comment #: CA12197
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Comment #CA12196
I'm a litigant not a criminal defense lawyer.
By reading the comments,iIt seems that somehow we were all victims of her abuse of Judicial discretion.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA12196
Rating:1.3
Comments:
Arnold Schwarzenegger's worst mistake as Governor in appointing C Byrd to judgeship in the Los Angeles County Superior Court. BAD MISTAKE! :(
Many innocent children suffered the consequences of her incompetency and biased approach. To: C BYRD,
What didn't kill us made us STRONGER. My the Universe be the one to judge YOU someday!

Litigant

Comment #: CA12195
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Horrifically bias! She bases her decision not on evidence but the attorney she favors and/or knows personally. I would personally give her a 0. If she dislikes you, she will articulate it and make sure it gets on the transcripts. Factual evidence does not mean anything to her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11559
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Horrible Judge. BIASED! Unfair. Forgetful. Lazy. Incompetent. Does not review the papers. Does not have the demeanor to be a judge. Should not be serving as a judge.

Litigant

Comment #: CA11051
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Byrd shouldn't be a judge in family courts.
I am not sure but I heard that she was a corporate lawyer before she became w Judge in Superior Family Court.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA10261
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Excellent judicial officer? Not!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10210
Rating:10.0
Comments:
This is an excellent judicial officer. Perhaps not a Juhas or Lewis, but most definitely an above-average, fair, and smart judicial officer.

Litigant

Comment #: CA10059
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This is a most bias judge I have ever seen. She always rules against self represented litigants. I filed notice on appeal on her two orders and I won in both cases cases on appeal against this judge. Then I was able to change judge.

Litigant

Comment #: CA9989
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This was the most UNJUST experience I have ever had in the pursuit of justice. I went in for a custodial issue, where she instructed me to provide more evidence. I then spent the next many months building a thick packet of incontrovertible evidence to the issue at hand, and then went back to present it in her court. She literally IGNORED all that I presented, and ruled the opposite, completely contrary to the evidence, and so leaving in place a continuing bad situation for my child. Until this experience, I thought a court of law decides on the merits of evidence, certainly not in opposition to it -- I suppose I was wrong.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8688
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Cuckoo Byrd has a lot of psychological problems that she is not willing to acknowledge. Expect her to take out her frustrations on you and your children!

Other

Comment #: CA8620
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Completely hoodwinked by opposing counsel. Either very [Redacted by Ed.] ! Does not consider both sides and even makes egregious statements in complete opposite of presented evidence. Inept in understanding the dissomaster input and ramifications. Allows for incomplete disclosure of assets ignoring clear substantiating evidence. Should not be presiding on bench.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8569
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Cuckoo Byrd should be thrown off the bench. She doesn't read any of the paperwork and actually admitted this in our case on the record.

Litigant

Comment #: CA8456
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Christine Byrd needs to fly the coop! She has no business wearing this robe of distinction and should be disbarred. Coming from the solar power industry, she has no knowledge of family law and appears to be merely doing this for a nice cushy job as an arbitrator when she retires. She rules on opinion- her own, and not by law and makes unbelievable statements in court! For instance, she told the defendant legal advise during a trial! She told the petitioner which profession she should go into. She made rulings, even though the law clearly stated the opposite and she was reminded of it, then made threatening statements to the litigants should they dare to cross her! How many complaints does it take to get this woman off the bench?

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7855
Rating:1.4
Comments:
Run, do not walk, to file your 170.6. Awful. Incompetent. Family law area with absolute no regard for the law. Blatantly biased. Knows most litigants cannot afford to appeal so gets away with violating every statute she wants. Complete travesty for litigants.

Other

Comment #: CA7765
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This justice is not blind. She judges with her eyes and not her mind. She reaches her conclusions before hearing both sides. She skims the material at best. To put it in her words, "This is clearly fraud". Proof of burden YOUR HONER? It is 'HER' belief. Belief has no place in a court room, facts and evidence do. Two things she CLEARLY ignores because she has GUT feelings. Get this biased woman off the bench!

Other

Comment #: CA6999
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I had Catherine Byrd as a judge in 2010.. petitioner had an attorney I was pro per after allowing the council for pet. to stand in open court and accuse me of being capable of murder for hire in a fam law hearing she had the nerve to tell me if I dared to contact the bar regarding his statements or the threatening emails he had been sending me for months id find myself on the short end of the stick in court.. even though it is my legal right as a American citizen to pursue due process and any civil rights violation sanctions against council or any court officer.. worst judge ever now I have lopez-giss.. things just got worse.. byrd 2nd worst judge ever

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6952
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Quickly becoming one of the most appealed and overturned judges on Hill St.
Her rulings reek of back door deals or a complete disregard for children's safety and well being.
170.6 at all costs.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6439
Rating:1.0
Comments:
In the view of child advocates; Byrd has no understanding of domestic violence dynamics, does not follow the law, Indifferent to child abuse, places children with parents who strike and alienate children rather than safe parents, makes rulings based on personal opinion and conjecture. Dangerous rulings, possibly politically motivated.

Litigant

Comment #: CA6407
Rating:1.0
Comments:
If you don’t have a lawyer and your family law case is assigned to Byrd the first you thing you do is file "AFFIDAVIT OF PREJUDICE PREEMPTORY CHALLENGE TO JUDICIAL OFFICER" (Code Civ. Proc., §170.6), to get your case switched to another judge. The form can be found online and no reason is needed just sign the form and serve on other party and file proof of service.

Byrd's actions rise to the level of an abuse of discretion, as she now has made multiple ruling that are arbitrary and a unreasonable departure from precedent and settled judicial custom.

Byrd gives specialized treatment to attorneys over In Pro Per litigants, failing to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

Byrd's actions equal a color of law violation while violating parent's civil rights and taking kids away from fathers based on her intuition as a white women who has never dealt with minority parents before taking the bench as she was a corporate lawyer before becoming a judge.

Byrd is fully aware of Family Code Section § 3025, that states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, access to records and information pertaining to a minor child, including but not limited to, medical, dental, mental health and school records, shall not be denied to a parent because that parent is not the child’s custodial parent.”

However Byrd acts in defiance of common sense not making the information available to non-custodial parents or giving holidays schedules causing fathers to miss father's day with their children due to her ineptness.
Byrd will continues to rule in bad faith abusing her judicial discretion since the family court has no oversight and appeals are too costly.

Ever wonder why a father is not in a child's life, may not be his choice but the family courts or I mean Byrd's choice as she plays god on the bench ruining lives with the stroke of her pen.

Litigant

Comment #: CA6096
Rating:2.0
Comments:
inadequate or unfair. Doesn't read her cases, or perhaps she has preconceived opinions on certain people.
Indecisive and lack of knowledge on family law. relies too much on her weak memory.