Hon. Dalila C. Lyons See Rating Details
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.5 - 8 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      

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. Dalila C. Lyons


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10865
It doesn't get any worse than Lyons. Egotistical, territorial, close-minded, biased, tyrannical, vindictive, and power hungry. These types of individuals should be politicians rather than judges. She has this pretense of a no nonsense Latina, know it all, and "wise" woman who really knows what's going on, but she is really nothing more than a rude, chip-on-the shoulder tyrant who doesn't deserve the power she's gotten. Rude, abrupt, nasty, inconsiderate, uninformed and capricious describes her. I would kick her without a heart-beat if you're unfortunate enough to get her. You can tell she's one of those ambitious politician types who is looking to be appointed as an appellate justice. God forbid she ever makes it to the Court of Appeal. She should be kept far away from any governmental power of any type. I've known a lot of judges both personally and professionally, and I've never seen anyone as dense, conceited and egotistical as her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10597
Wow - avoid at all costs. There are many better options, and I can't think of any more capable of committing as much harm with so much inaction

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA10534
Many judges are somewhat gutless in making dispositive rulings on demurrers or MSJs and would rather punt to a jury so any ultimate bad decisions can be blamed on them. Damn the expenses to the parties. This is no Judge Lyons. She is cogent and will sanction missing deadlines, filings, order. If that is good depends on whether it benefits you to have the case efficiently handled. She will also give you a well thought out objective and definite ruling to follow and kick a case on demurrer if the logic is there.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA9845
What an absolute failure on the bench! What waste of tax dollars! This judge either doesn't read the papers, doesn't comprehend the papers, rubber stamps her clerk's preliminary rulings, or some combination thereof. She is an utter failure in understanding nuance and issues. Instead, she pounces on technicalities to assert her power and wastes precious resources and time making rulings on trivial, technical issues, only to have attorneys do more work needlessly. She is extremely territorial, defensive, rude, and power-hungry. She covers up her ineptitude with unwarranted and trivial technical rulings. She is definitely not qualified for anything more complex than a small-claims case. If you care about the merits of your case, ding her with a 170.6. If you want it to be a crap-shoot and are hoping for luck, keep her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA9614
This Judge is afraid to rule on much of anything and will simply try to deny all motions -- probably because she does not understand them. She is not particularly bright, but her defining characteristic is her almost bizarre refusal to make definitive rulings.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8997
FANTASTIC judge - if you're looking for a judge who doesn't bother reading the papers, predetermines her desired outcome, and then makes the ruling accordingly. She issued a tentative three days before our reply was even DUE and then took umbrage at the fact that not only did I ask her to reconsider her tentative, but when I stated i would not submit on the tentative, i was read the riot act, listening to her complain about how "busy" her workload was, and how she just doesn't have the time to entertain oral arguments on every case.

Lazy, careless, rude. A perfect 170.6 candidate if there ever was one.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7091
extremely deliberative and unsure of herself in civil copyright, employment matters