Comment #: CA3845
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Juhas displayed an alarming amount of hubris, sarcasm, and lightheartedness with a serious domestic violence case at Mosk. The victims were a single mother and her special needs young child and the perpetrator was a violent disgruntled ex boyfriend who continually and repeatedly violated the TRO the victims had during the proceedings to determine if a permanent RO would be granted. Another judged ruled the perpetrator had violated the existing order during the trial- this fact was if ores by Juhas: the perp had the money for counsel, the victims did not. The victim was an articulate advocate backed by domestic violence agency Sojourn in the court room. Police lieutenants attempted to testify for victim, Juhas shut them down, eye witnesses to the violence and stalking of the victims were disregarded, Juhas prejudiced the victims be refusing to enforce their properly served subpoenas. The child, an 8 year old who had witnessed the mother being beaten and chased down in the street, was allowed to testify- Juhas ignored her testimony. His ruling to deny protection to the victims was so egregiously cavalier and nasty that those present to hear his proclamation against the victims were left aghast and speechless. So unbelievable was the ruling whichever the victims exposed to mortal danger, it was assumed Juhas had conducted ex parte communication with an attorney from another case who was not involved in the DV before Juhas. If you are a victim of domestic violence do not go before Juhas, at all costs. File your 170.6 and escape his pure and unethical bias against victims.

Comment #: CA3318
Rating:1.0
Comments:
The judge hardly ever seemed to read any of the documents before him in my divorce trial. He instead would get angry about the time it was taking...however the case was continually continued because if his schedule. Additionally, the other side was playing a lot of games, which would have been easy to see if he would read any paperwork, but he didn't, instead chastising both sides. Additionally, his final judgment was extremely difficult to interpret and he didn't even both to give dollar amounts, further prolonging the process a my ex is now arguing about how Hoa judge can be interpreted. It was also extremely rare that he followed any judicial procedures, including allowing my ex to flagrantly disregard the ATROs.

Comment #: CA1559
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I can’t say enough about some judges in the Los Angeles court system. Zakon, Shaller, Friedenthal, Steinberg, Loomis, Stevens and others. I asked your friend Juhas many times to recuse himself from my case and he refused. The friction started when I discovered, by an accidental admission by my ex, that my 14-year old daughter has not had a facial reconstruction surgery which is 3 years late. Zeidler from the dependency court in Monterey Park, had rubber stamped DCFS’s desires by giving full legal and physical custody to my ex. I requested from Juhas to allow me to take part in the medical decision making of my daughter, since I am the one required to provide her medical insurance, I am responsible for half of her unpaid medical bills and that my ex, had not been responsible and diligent enough to take up the care. I cited extraordinary circumstances, which I believed were justifiable for him to act on my request. He denied my motion. Since I am disabled and I had been receiving disability payments of $ 2,000, of which, $1,500. Were taken away for alimony and child support, I brought several OSCs hoping to modify the support. After approximately a year and a half, the matter bounced between Commonwealth and Hill street courts until Juhas heard it. Knowing that I had a two year-old child from my new marriage and knowing that my knew wife is an undocumented alien, unable to work, Juhas disregarded my argument to terminate spousal support in its 6th year, from an 8 and ½ year marriage. He denied the motion under the pretext that as long as my, college educated, physically and mental capable ex, is carrying for our 14-year old child, it would be a hardship for him to terminate the spousal support of $570.00, which is into it s 7th year. He refused to consider evidence showing my new family living in a leaking trailer, surviving on $800 per month. The matter has been appealed, I had filled a writ to have him removed from my case, I had written a compliant to judge Steinberg to no avail and I am still waiting for a decision from the Commission on Judicial Performance, the decision on the writ and the process of the appeal is on-going. I forgot to mention that he had denied to motions 170.1 through 170.6 and I had filled a new OSC to modify, which is scheduled to be heard on September 6th, 2011. You can follow the case on Dmini vs. Dmini, PD038219.

Comment #: CA1558
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He is not very bright....

Comment #: CA1427
Rating:1.0
Comments:
egotist. wants to show others that he is the boss. loose on judicial procedures. obviously unfair to even the the viewing public.

Comment #: CA1401
Rating:10.0
Comments:
I've been practicing family law in L.A. County for over 20 years. Family law judges come and go (mostly go because it is the toughest assignment in the entire system). We've had some great judges and not-so-great judges. Judge Juhas is one of the all time greats. Fair, ethical, hard-working, and very smart. When I'm lucky enough to draw him I know the outcome will be the best decision for the litigants.