Hon. Ronald F. Frank See Rating Details
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.9 - 6 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)

Please type what you see below:


What others have said about Hon. Ronald F. Frank


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA33264
This is by far the worst judge I have ever encountered and I have been around several judges. He is HORRIBLE.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA28783
Judge Frank handles unlawful Detainer cases in Inglewood where I appear regularly on behalf of Landlords. He is generally pro-tenant but it goes so far beyond that. Judge Frank is very easily persuaded by almost any argument made by tenants in his courtroom, not matter how clearly bogus it may be. A default judgment or even a stipulated settlement means nothing to him. He loves to make attorneys show up with process servers for live testimony about whether or not an action has been properly served. He routinely is in a foul mood and yells at attorneys and litigants for things like not going to the right side of the table. He automatically gives every tenant an extra 5 days to move out. He also, depending on his whim that day, will during the middle of a hearing or trial decide he wants you to come back for some motion he decides to set on his own. I advise all of Unlawful Detainer clients to file a 170.6 against him.


Comment #: CA27740
Rating:Not Rated
God awful. Rude and discourteous.


Comment #: CA26977
I just left the small claims courtroom of Judge Ronald F. Frank in Department 8 of the Inglewood Superior Courthouse. This post is not about the details of the case. I am still in amazement that he had the temerity to only award one-half of a contracted amount, even when the defendant perjured and contradicted himself at least 3 times in less than 5 minutes. If you should ever see Ronald F. Frank running for Office 61 of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, vote for anyone else who has a pulse.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA18954
I appeared for an unlawful detainer matter and watched Judge Frank handled various matters before mine. A lot of the parties before him are not represented. He takes the time and effort to explain procedure and his ruling to all. He ensures that the trial was conduct fairly. He was incredibly patient and polite to everyone in his courtroom.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA16932
One of the fairest judges on the bench. This judge rolled up his sleeves and spend literally tens of hours researching the law and determining what is fair in unchartered territories of healthcare law in order to determine an equitable ruling between litigants and the multibillion dollar healthcare insurance carriers. He has ruled on numerous cases , both for and against the small guy, but his rulings are fair, well thought out and he explains in detail the how and why. If either side disagrees with him, he will listen - to a fault- attentively and determine if there was an issue with his ruling. He is not a haughty judge at all. He is very humble. I truly cannot understand why anyone would give him less than 10 stars. The system is wasting this resource by having him rule on small claims cases. He really should be dealing with much more complex cases in civil court. HE IS THAT GOOD!!!! If they do move him to a higher bench I will truly miss his clarity of his thought process and his will of true equitable rulings .
If you are lucky enough to get this guy and have a righteous claim , make sure you do not even think of a peremptory challenge. He will give you a fair ruling and spend the time figuring out the issues

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA14966
One of the worst judges ever. very insecure and not very bright. Should not be on the bench.


Comment #: CA14951
Bad judge. Nasty temperament and unfair. Should be kicked off being a judge. Unfair and prejudiced. Taks about his personal life and his vacations. A complete jerk!


Comment #: CA14950
This judge seems to be biased against women. He is erratic, mean and nasty, He says one thing and then immediately, changes mind and is nasty to litigants.I consider him one of the worst judges and feel she should be voted off the bench as he is a disgrace. Very condescending and unprofessional. Suffers from small man syndrome. Has to be nasty and sarcastic to feel better about himself.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12875
Allows his clerks to enter default judgments without NOTICE and will even brag about taking vacation during the time clerk entered default. Doesn't care if no hearing on merits. Doesn't care if plaintiff's do not serve properly and lack of adherence to CCP