Hon. Amy D. Hogue See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   1.7 - 17 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 1 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. Amy D. Hogue


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6161
Rating:1.0
Comments:
A very, very unskilled ignorant judge who has no control over her court. Fiends get away with breaking the law in her court if she likes you. Just awful that a pig like this is allowed to judge anything.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6118
Rating:1.0
Comments:
How does someone this incompetent become a judge?

Court Staff

Comment #: CA6115
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
FYI: Single family dwellings are not covered by LARSO. To determine relocation benefits, it's an Administration Process determined by the L.A. Housing Dept. NOT BY A JURY OR A TRIBUNAL. The tenant needs to be a PAYING TENANT and submit documents to the L.A. Housing Dept. Then and only then is it decided if there are any relocation benefits forthcoming. Juries do not decide LAWS, they decide FACTS. Read up on the Rent Stabilization Law before shooting from the hip.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3587
Rating:3.9
Comments:
Judge Hogue is generally pleasant enough, but she thinks she doesn't have to read the briefs. She rules on critical issues from the seat of her pants, often reversing herself mid-stream. She apparently views herself as the civil defendant's last line of defense, ruling again and again for the corporate position, often with no legal authority to support her. When a judge in a contested factual matter asks you, "Do you expect me to believe that the witness is lying?" how do you respond? "In your case, your honor, no"? It seems she believes that company employees always and only tell the truth.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA3333
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Hogue is a disgrace to the court, the judicial system, to society and to the many lives she has probably ruined in her time on the bench. She has abused her power, she has abused the idea of fairness and the fulfillment of justice which should be her job. She is so much like a mad dictator, flouting the laws, defying logic, abusing litigants, creating her own personal laws, being openly prejudiced. What standards does one have the fulfill to be a judge? they should be sound of mind, which she clearly is not, they should be fair, which she is not, they should follow the law, which she does not. She should act respectfully and treat others with dignity, which she does not. She resembles so much the ill mannered young child who was never taught right from wrong. I feel that people like her, in the positions that they hold, abuse us and our system of law, and will lead it to it's degradation into chaos and lawlessness. She is a criminal on the inside, destroying the system of justice from the inside rather than from the outside. Weep for this country if people like her are allowed to continue their reign of tyranny and abuse and thievery.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3200
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge is anti-landlord. If you have an unlawful detainer set for trial or any case wherein the litigant is a landlord stay far away. Abuse of discretion and to be honest she is a "leftist"- unless it comes to her and her husband's wallet- he is a class action atty. so you know where her head is at. She should be an atty. for a radical leftist organization- Berkeley style- or perhaps Chicago !

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3195
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Stay away from this Judge- She is pro-plaintiff, will bend over backwards in such a fashion as to appear as if she is #2 plaintiff. She should quit the bench before the Judicial Committee Investigates her style.

Other

Comment #: CA2906
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
That's true Judge Amy Hogue doesn't deserve any star . She is the most terrible judge in history . What a same !!!!

Litigant

Comment #: CA2900
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
She does not even deserve "one star." I am not an atty. but I know about laws and municipal codes. My case was an eviction with tenants who have been sitting for years without paying rent. I am the plaintiff. Judge Amy, failed miserably in understanding rent control laws- even when explained to her "like a toddler" she failed to grasp and feigned an illness during the trial in order to take a long break. I believe that her clerks in the backroom (of which they are not actual attys.) decide her cases and then she simply signs the judgment. It's horrendous that she allow to remain on the bench. She should resign with honor before she is recalled. Yes, this should be the very next step. JUST HORRIBLE.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2367
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Terrible.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1720
Rating:1.0
Comments:
amy d. hogue presiding over the case southern california edison vs. california bank and trust and robert edgar and calvin weinkamp in an eminent domain and quiet title action.i am extremely concerned about judge hogue, as the transcripts prove she is very biased againt me because southern california edison prefer mr. weinkamp to own the property despite the fact judge hogue, clearly knows that he did not perfect adverse possession and did not even pay the taxes consistently or have any type of control over the property parcel 13, furthermore two declarations from california bank and trust stating that he was completely forclosed on parcel 13 and quitclaimed the parcel 13 to me so that there would not be any ambiguity , almost two years ago the los angeles county assessors office declared that i own parcel 13 and billed me for supplemental taxes and escaped taxes in which i paid immediately. she would not allow the assessors supplemental paid taxes into evidence, AND ROBERT HENNON A LICENSED SURVEYOR THAT STATED IN HIS DECLARATION THAT MR. CALVIN WEINKAMP WAS COMPLETELY FORCLOSED ON AND EXTINGUISHED ON THE WHOLE TEN ACRE LAND........and i am very CONCERNED AND ALARMED....... that she will not allow the california bank and trust quitclaim deed and two declarations into evidence, and reverse her statement that there was a triable issue between calvin weinkamp and california bank and trust,as i took over their position, mr.weinkamp needs to prove that he perfected adverse possession to the jury before judge hogue gives my property to him THATS THE LAW. PERIOD ...I AM EXTREMELY CONCERNED THAT HER PREVIOUS EMPLOYER ENJOY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AS THEIR CLIENT.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1719
Rating:1.0
Comments:
amy d. hogue presiding over the case southern california edison vs. california bank and trust and robert edgar and calvin weinkamp in an eminent domain and quiet title action.i am extremely concerned about judge hogue, as the transcripts prove she is very biased againt me because southern california edison prefer mr. weinkamp to own the property despite the fact judge hogue, clearly knows that he did not perfect adverse possession and did not even pay the taxes consistently or have any type of control over the property parcel 13, furthermore two declarations from california bank and trust stating that he was completely forclosed on parcel 13 and quitclaimed the parcel 13 to me so that there would not be any ambiguity , almost two years ago the los angeles county assessors office declared that i own parcel 13 and billed me for supplemental taxes and escaped taxes in which i paid immediately. she would not allow the assessors supplemental paid taxes into evidence, AND ROBERT HENNON A LICENSED SURVEYOR THAT STATED IN HIS DECLARATION THAT MR. CALVIN WEINKAMP WAS COMPLETELY FORCLOSED ON AND EXTINGUISHED ON THE WHOLE TEN ACRE LAND........and i am very CONCERNED AND ALARMED....... that she will not allow the california bank and trust quitclaim deed and two declarations into evidence, and reverse her statement that there was a triable issue between calvin weinkamp and california bank and trust,as i took over their position, mr.weinkamp needs to prove that he perfected adverse possession to the jury before judge hogue gives my property to him THATS THE LAW. PERIOD ...I AM EXTREMELY CONCERNED THAT HER PREVIOUS EMPLOYER ENJOY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AS THEIR CLIENT.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1718
Rating:1.0
Comments:
amy d. hogue presiding over the case southern california edison vs. california bank and trust and robert edgar and calvin weinkamp in an eminent domain and quiet title action.i am extremely concerned about judge hogue, as the transcripts prove she is very biased againt me because southern california edison prefer mr. weinkamp to own the property despite the fact judge hogue, clearly knows that he did not perfect adverse possession and did not even pay the taxes consistently or have any type of control over the property parcel 13, furthermore two declarations from california bank and trust stating that he was completely forclosed on parcel 13 and quitclaimed the parcel 13 to me so that there would not be any ambiguity , almost two years ago the los angeles county assessors office declared that i own parcel 13 and billed me for supplemental taxes and escaped taxes in which i paid immediately. she would not allow the assessors supplemental paid taxes into evidence, AND ROBERT HENNON A LICENSED SURVEYOR THAT STATED IN HIS DECLARATION THAT MR. CALVIN WEINKAMP WAS COMPLETELY FORCLOSED ON AND EXTINGUISHED ON THE WHOLE TEN ACRE LAND........and i am very CONCERNED AND ALARMED....... that she will not allow the california bank and trust quitclaim deed and two declarations into evidence, and reverse her statement that there was a triable issue between calvin weinkamp and california bank and trust,as i took over their position, mr.weinkamp needs to prove that he perfected adverse possession to the jury before judge hogue gives my property to him THATS THE LAW. PERIOD ...I AM EXTREMELY CONCERNED THAT HER PREVIOUS EMPLOYER ENJOY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AS THEIR CLIENT.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1717
Rating:1.0
Comments:
amy d. hogue presiding over the case southern california edison vs. california bank and trust and robert edgar and calvin weinkamp in an eminent domain and quiet title action.i am extremely concerned about judge hogue, as the transcripts prove she is very biased againt me because southern california edison prefer mr. weinkamp to own the property despite the fact judge hogue, clearly knows that he did not perfect adverse possession and did not even pay the taxes consistently or have any type of control over the property parcel 13, furthermore two declarations from california bank and trust stating that he was completely forclosed on parcel 13 and quitclaimed the parcel 13 to me so that there would not be any ambiguity , almost two years ago the los angeles county assessors office declared that i own parcel 13 and billed me for supplemental taxes and escaped taxes in which i paid immediately. she would not allow the assessors supplemental paid taxes into evidence, AND ROBERT HENNON A LICENSED SURVEYOR THAT STATED IN HIS DECLARATION THAT MR. CALVIN WEINKAMP WAS COMPLETELY FORCLOSED ON AND EXTINGUISHED ON THE WHOLE TEN ACRE LAND........and i am very CONCERNED AND ALARMED....... that she will not allow the california bank and trust quitclaim deed and two declarations into evidence, and reverse her statement that there was a triable issue between calvin weinkamp and california bank and trust,as i took over their position, mr.weinkamp needs to prove that he perfected adverse possession to the jury before judge hogue gives my property to him THATS THE LAW. PERIOD ...I AM EXTREMELY CONCERNED THAT HER PREVIOUS EMPLOYER ENJOY SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON AS THEIR CLIENT.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1716
Rating:1.0
Comments:
i am very concerned about judge amy d. hogue as she seems very biased against me in my case versus southern california edison as they are one of her previous employer where she was a senior partner biggest clients, and seems to favor them at any cost, she does not seem to take the time to understand the case, it seems very intentionally . as she has not allowed any of our evidence in, everythig seems to be heresay, and seems to be anxious in pleasing the southern california edison attorney ,as they have made it obvious their prefrence of who should own parcel 13 in a quiet title action even when all the evidence clearly points to the crystal clear fact that he was completely forclosed on in several declarations and foreclosure publicly recorded documents, i sincerely hope i am wrong about her and i want be forced to appeal her wrong decision. concerned defendant and cross defendant.

Litigant

Comment #: CA1358
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Independently from my comment, which will follow, the rate for the case decided in chamber through long distance call to cover lack of "unfamiliarity" looks very odd in the sequence of natural events, shall be offensive for legal professionals and so out of order ...

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1347
Rating:1.5
Comments:
Worst judge ever in employment matters. Might as well call her the "employer's" lawyer! She is a definite ding.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1139
Rating:9.0
Comments:
Having read the other comments, I was very apprehensive about an approaching civil trial set for her department. A few weeks before trial, we had a MSC which she conducted in her chambers.
In a nutshell, she handled it fairly, evenhandedly and with both firmness and reserve. When she was unfamiliar with a point of law, she took the time to talk to counsel and get their views. She even made a long distance phone call to a distant party.
The case settled - probably at the right amount. It was a job well done.
- Over 30 year litigator

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1101
Rating:1.5
Comments:
Terrible judge. Worst I've seen in 25 years. Poor judgment skills. Poor analysis. lack of knowledge in employment law. Makes decisions in favor of defendants. Has nno understanding of the rules of evidence.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA1093
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I agree with the last rating of 1.3. She is clueless as to the. My client charged with misd. 422 and was still on juvy probation until 25 for 664/187. Client did NOT testify yet she allowed "victim" to tell jury she was scared of client b/c he was on probation for attempted murder! Judge said before trial, and I quote, "I don't see how you have a defense to this case." Jury came back NG and her mouth dropped to the floor. Only credit I give her is she didn't violate my client for another misd. PV though she could have said, "well, maybe not BARD, but I FIND by preponderance, he violated probation..." She didn't. Even she's not that bad.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA476
Rating:1.3
Comments:
Amy Hogue is one of the worst judges in the world. She was a civil lawyer for some big firm for years and she should have stayed there. In criminal matters, she is a total buffoon, a moron, a cretin, a rubber-stamp for the DA, an unmitigated disaster. She does not know the rules of evidence and she is incapable of handling even the most minor piece of litigation.