Hon. Patrick A. Cathcart See Rating Details
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.5 - 6 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 4 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      

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)

What others have said about Hon. Patrick A. Cathcart


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA11846
This Judge has exceeded his shelf life. I am sure he has made a contribution to society, however, he is truly out of touch with family law and is starting to become forgetful. At one hearing, he issued an order in the middle of the hearing, and the last word out of his mouth was basically in contrast to what he had ordered. He clearly ignores evidence and is lacking in objectivity. He is biased and makes decisions based on preferences and not current law or evidence before the court. He favors the high-powered attorneys and attempts to curry favor with them through his biased rulings. He is not doing anyone a favor through his biased rulings, as they will only engender more litigation and only the high-powered attorneys will benefit (not litigants or their children). He makes very inappropriate comments from the bench - conduct which is not befitting a judicial officer. He is not capable of properly applying the law because he does not know family law. I concur with others’ comments - he should be sent to handle a less sensitive area of the law, such as traffic court - or probably retire altogether. Citizens have a right to justice. There is no justice in Judge Cathcart’s courtroom.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA11703
Judge is not qualified to be seating in a family law courtroom. He has no interest and he has said as much. " I don't care". He is arrogant and rude. Always unprepared makes decisions based on his personal feelings not the facts or evidence and the law.


Comment #: CA11702
Judge is out of touch with family and minor issues or needs. Makes comments that are innapropriate. Excuses lack of responsibility by parents. Does not seem prepared to objectively or thoroughly hear a case. Its obvious that he is careless and fails to read what is submited. Ignores evidence. Is biased and makes decisions based on preferences and not current law or evidence before the court. He is rude. Is out of touch with childrens and minors educational, emotional, social needs and makes decisions based on siding with one of the sides despite obvious negligence by that person. Makes personal criticism from the bench that are not appropriate to comment from the bench. Arrogantly cuts attorneys and frequently acts arbitrarily and makes remarks such as "it does not matter to me". If childrens life do not matter to him or stability in childrens life. the Judge has no place overseeing family court. After over 5 years of horrible performance and obvious lack of knowledge and care for his duties he should be send to handle a less sensitive area of the law. But truly I am would be sorry for any citizens where this Judge hears their matters. Since he gives no thought. His gender bias and age demonstrates that he is out of touch with mutual responsibility of parents to see, work, support , emotionally, educationally, and socially. Basically he seems to be leaving in the 1950's and deciding based on whi he takes a liking to and quickly makes up his mind that he is going to rule against the side he does not like. Females may do a little better regardless of lack of evidence to the contrary. It is unacceptable that he makes remarks such as someone should not work although they have children and are responsible for their support based on their gender. And is easily swayed by dramatic tears without seeing through that tears are to manipulate him. Which works every time. Unfortunately this is just a "job" he could just as easily be overseeing matters in traffic court and not care. However his lack of attention to the obvious evidence, childrens well being and weighting objectively each case. This judge would cause less harm in traffic court. And the lack of care would not cause the amount of harm that he brings daily in the courtroom. Citizens have a right to justice. This judge is travesty to justice and affecting families and children. Someone in charge should take charge and have the judge moved out of family court immediately before he continues to destroy the lifes of more children. Please we plead place a judge in this courtroom who is in touch with the law and cares for families and children that come in daily into the court room. We can't have more families and children vicitimize. I hope you read this and take immediate action.


Comment #: CA11588
Does not follow the law. Follows pure emotion. Did not even make my ex turn over discovery even though we asked for it 3 times (in 3 court appearances- costing me attorney fees for her and me). In the end, she still never gave discovery and he said, "I don't think she did it maliciously". Everything she does in intentional. He was not my trial judge but did not follow the trial judge's mandate that she become self-sufficient so I am apparently on the hook for alimony for life! Azzwipe.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10410
Judge Cathcart is always courteous. I am particularly impressed with his unbiased pleasantness for everyone despite race, station in life, gender, sexual orientation, pro per/represented status or any other distinguishing characteristic. I believe he reads the pleadings and cites the relevant codes when making his decisions, which is how it should be. He is very accessible and can work on many levels which works very well on a level playing field. For instance, when both parties are unrepresented, I have seen Hon. Cathcart exercise extraordinary compassion and patience in querying the parties as to their objective and then explaining to each of them exactly what needs to be done next. Similarly, I have seen him respectfully listen, and consider, the arguments of the big firm attorneys along side a new, solo practitioner and then ruling on the merits.

The one place where things get hung up, take time and start seeming unfair is when ONE party is represented. I don't believe it's intentional, but the unrepresented party becomes ignored during hearings because like most judges, Hon. Cathcart is going to speak to the attorney--no matter whose side it represents. Even if the unrepresented party's motion is granted, the judge will likely ask the ATTORNEY to write up the order which further strengthens the rapport between the judge and represented party...it's a human thing, which is more than I can say for most of the Mosk judicial officers in the family law division...

Cathcart does NOT like emotional pleas in court and will not base his judicial rulings on anything except a solid legal argument based on the controlling authorities.

I wouldn't 170.6 this one...but if you don't have an attorney and the other side does, I would definitely suggest getting counsel of your own even if you have to ask for legal fees from the other side to do so.


Comment #: CA10118
What a disappointment in the judicial system. He allowed a plaintiff to essentially buy a restraining order. Money talks in his courtroom. Bring half a dozen witnesses, expert witnesses paid thousands of dollars and tie up the court room for days, rather than truly bringing justice to genuine cases of domestic violence. I'm saddened that the effects his decision negatively impacts innocent people.
Furthermore, he allowed irrelevant questions, having nothing to do with domestic violence, as though it were a session of People's Court, made for entertainment.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA9680
I had to go to this judge 5 times for 1 support hearing to reduce her support. She did not provide my attorney with her new address so that she could be served with subpoenas. The judge moved the hearing date by 2 months so that we could get proper discovery (she has been cohabitating for almost 3 years and was served a Gavron Warning 4 years ago). She still did not give my attorney the mandated paperwork. The judge not only ruled no reduction in support but said that I had to pay $4,000 in attorney fees for her. 4 of the 5 times in court was caused by her and I had to pay some of her attorney fees. 1) she asked for 60 more days because she supposedly moved. Judge gave her 21 days and told her to provide my attorney with an address to be served. 2) Went for the hearing for support reduction and my attorney explained that she still hadn't given us a place to serve her. So the judge now gave another 60 days for discovery (something she was supposed to do the first time). 3) She now goes to court to ask for attorney fees because of so many hearings. He awards her $4,000 (keep in mind that she owes me over $5,000 for overpayment in support). 4) the hearing in which he denies the lowered support....she still hasn't given us discovery and we had filed a motion to compel before the hearing. 5) Hearing for motion to compel (yes, comes after the support hearing even though it was filed before the support hearing). He denies the request because there was no further motion in front of him for the discovery even though she never complied in the first place and he made a ruling based on emotion and she never had to do anything he told her to do and I paid to go to court 5 times...longer than the trial.

Everytime we went, the judge had the wrong paperwork and thought that it was all for an upcoming trial in which we told him every single time that the trial was 3 years earlier and a decision wat 2 1/2 years earlier. He doesn't even know what is going on.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8522
This judge seems to make appropriate rulings. He requires real evidence and will not make decisions based only on argument or opinion, which I appreciate. My only issue is that he calls up the most complex matters first and it seems that he gives priority to expensive lawyers that he knows. I had a quick (5 minute) matter, where the moving party didn't even show up, and was called LAST (at 11:50 am). I am grateful that I was not carried over until lunch, but my client incurred unnecessary fees. If I have one suggestion to make, it would be to get rid of the quickies first.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8489
This judge should retire. He allowed my spouse to remain in custody of our children after I filed a police report against my wife. I was arrested for spousal abuse and he did not take into account that my wife has a history of violence. She filed a restraining order and kept me from our children for a year. Yes, justice was served......


Comment #: CA8127
Rating:Not Rated
Judge Cathcart is an embarrassment to the legal profession. He does not read pleadings. He has no concept of what is happening in the matter. He is biased. He has not interest in discerning the truth of the matter. He is intellectually lazy. And he is a total wimp!


Comment #: CA5495
Awful judge. Has no family law experience. Befuddled is the best way to describe him on the bench.