Hon. William F. Fahey See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.8 - 7 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      
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




What others have said about Hon. William F. Fahey


Comments


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA5364
Rating:3.3
Comments:
Judge regards pro se plaintiffs with disdain. He didn't provide adequate time for oral argument. It was obvious by his line of questioning that he had only briefly read the pleadings.

He appeared not to be familiar with the California Homeowners Bill of Rights,
and recent case law that supported the homeowner's right to challenge the standing of a party's right to foreclose.2502

Litigant

Comment #: CA5363
Rating:2.0
Comments:
I sued the pretender lender in a foreclosure, alleging that the so-called beneficiary could not prove standing to foreclose. I had submitted copies of forged assignments of the DOT to the Court which were ignored.

Judge failed to read my pleadings and did not even look at the Exhibits. He made prejudicial remarks about my case - asking me if I thought it was right to be living in a $1M 'rent-free' for three years and if my goal in bringing my suit was to 'win a house for free'!!!!!

He dismissed my case with prejudice without any explanation as to how I had failed to state a cause of action!!!

He is a disgrace to the robes he wears.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5072
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge and his courtroom staff all act like they are doing the public a favor by being there doing their job poorly

Litigant

Comment #: CA4848
Rating:1.0
Comments:
He has a poor understanding of First Amendment rights. He tends to ignore statutes and case law in favor of personal opinion.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2996
Rating:3.0
Comments:
I generally feel that judges in Los Angeles need to abandon the idea of trying a case in less than a year after filing in every case. I don't have any trial experience with Judge Fahey, but his pre-trial conduct leaves much to be desired. Personally, I, and many other judges for that matter, will allow at least one trial continuance no matter what. Judge Fahey will simply not allow trial continuances,no matter how diligent you've been. He does this to encourage settlement, which I'm sure works a lot of the time, but when it becomes clear that a case isn't going to settle, give counsel a break. It's just selfish to put such a huge burden on counsel (causing them to work nights and weekends, and neglect their other cases) just so you can potentially remove one case from your docket because you're banking on counsel being afraid to try the case.

I believe Judge Fahey either never practiced civil litigation, or he has forgotten how difficult and stressful it is to be a civil litigator. Just like the rest of the staff in LASC, if they have to choose between lifting their little finger to do something and helping counsel tremendously, or doing nothing and putting a horrendous burden on counsel, they will choose doing nothing every time.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA2976
Rating:1.0
Comments:
He is the most biased, terrible tyrant judge I have every seen. Avoid him like a plague. I can't believe he hasn't been taken off the bench because he is so biased to one side.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2705
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This is the worst, most biased, individual I have ever tried a case before in over 30 years of practice. He does not understand the law or care what it says. He does not understand the evidence code. He denied me the right to cross-examine the other party. He decided the case in the first five minutes. He permitted the other side to resurrect causes of action they had voluntarily abandoned, and did not give my the opportunity to counter the "new" claims. I would never, under any circumstances, ever try another case in front of this judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA48
Rating:8.7
Comments:
I thought Judge Fahey was very evenhanded, industrious, and detail oriented. He showed no particular bias and seems to care about what he is doing.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA15
Rating:9.5
Comments:
Excellent trial judge. Moves cases well. Expects a lot from the lawyers but lets them try their cases.