Hon. Tamila E. Ipema See Rating Details
Superior Court
San Diego County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   5.7 - 2 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 3 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. Tamila E. Ipema



Comment #: CA10812
As the Plaintiff of a case:
1) I watched her run her court with no court reporter (effectively leaving all parties with no recourse against her minute order and findings); and,

2) I watched her issue an unproven and non-existent criminal conviction against an innocent person, in her civil court; and,

3) I watched her "Lochnerize" from the bench, similar to the infamous Lochner Case; and,

4) A simple internet search of Judge Tamila Ipema uncovers several similar allegations; and,

5) Hopefully, when it comes time for her re-election, someone reads what I've written here and carries it with them in their run against her for judge; and,

6) My attorney in the case, George Ramos Jr. was a horrible attorney because he led her down that pathway for the entire hearing; and she was foolish enough to follow him.


Comment #: CA10584
She is bias agianst pro se litigants with no regard for the law. I suggest hiring a court reporter for her hearings because if you challenge something she said she syas "there's no record of that". She claimed on the rocord her court makes no mistakes, yet that very set of minutes for that hearing was full of mistakes.(hence the need for a court reporter)She feels no need to authenticate evidence claimed to exist even when it's legally put at issue and shown to contradict. She encourages perjury to be committed by plaintiffs. If she doesn't like you, she'll rule on motions before you can respond to the motion in legally allowed time frame. She actually ruled on a motion against me on the very same day it was filed.. before I was even served with the motion! Then despite the court record showing that to be the case, she denied she did it.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8120
I am an journalist. She allowed me to come to the bench on hearsay then abandoned the case to "judicial review". She is too stupid and emotional to be a judge. Hearsay is hearsay and is never admissible. This case is in the appeals court. D068339
Protect the rich whites at any cost even to the constitution.


Comment #: CA7449
I have personally witnessed this judge violating the law on numerous occasions. Some of the highlights include making up her own "facts" and adding them to the record, not allowing pro per litigants to state their case or appear as their own legal counsel, calling pro per litigants "argumentative and difficult", refusing to allow written contracts as evidence, misreporting the proceedings in her minutes, etc. In the interest of the public justice, she should be removed from the bench.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6489
Wonderful Judge.


Comment #: CA4688
Rating:Not Rated
She is the worst kind of judge. She is willing to make a bad decision on purpose, and did not disclose a huge conflict of interest. I am forced to file an appeal against her decision, because she allowed irrelevant evidence against my objection. She allowed the opposing party to submit an article that I wrote, called "Is LASC a Racketeering Organization," even though she worked as a researcher at LASC in the field of family law before moving to San Diego.