Hon. Mary Ann Murphy See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.5 - 13 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   4.0 - 5 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. Mary Ann Murphy


Comments


Other

Comment #: CA5162
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Honorable Judgment Mary Ann Murphy and Honorable Judgment William . this is on Fraud agreement and on Mr, Bobby Pouya as a Attorney on that Case # BC372745 IN a LA Court and he did to Fraud on my Money on Money $ 42,000.00 and his a Boss said to me , ok, Michael Avapour when next time to call on this Office then to be a death , and I did to report on it to State Bar Association
at March-21-2014-Friday afternoon ,and your honor you will get on that reporting from the State LA Bar association . I am requesting to get on a help please ,..and the Judgment SK, of Collection Law to said oh, Mr, Michael Avaspour on some body else to got on that amount and her name is MS,Susan and you have to report on that Fraud to on Honorable Mary Ann Murphy .
***************
and another Case when yourhonor accept to process on it . Yes I am an Inventor of nvest problem then to checking on an investor Mr, Jimy Jamshid Sedghi from CA 90024 . then after 3 days on that Investor to got to check on that Technology Instruction documents Invention. then he gave on a his a Business Partner name: Mr, Jim Jevad Goudarzi then to sent on him In CHina Conturythen to sold on it by $ 18,000.000.00 Ok, I ma requesting from your honor. Would you to respond on that case please. then I would like to give on your a action response Fee on that Fraud Busines Case $ 9,000.000.00 and would you to accept on that case please .
((( Information )))
01) - the Fraud man name : Mr,Jimmy Jamshid Sedghi to Lives in the West wood City CA 90024. and he is a salesperson .
02) - on his a Business Partner ship
name : Mr, Jim Jevad Goudarzi to works on Fraud /Fake Documents then he did a Fraud Contracting on my Technology Invention:U.S.International plumber
then to made on my Technology Book on my Information and ona last page of my a Book ,
Respectfully !
Michael Avaspour ,
Inventor of Technology & Support of City Planning U.S.Project
a too appreciate on a helping please ,
5550 Owensmoth Avenue #C 112 Woodland Hills California 91367 .
Tel.(818)917-9047
project.avaspouryahoo.com

yourhonor please to help on me .

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5158
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Highly biased. She gives one side legal aid, legal suggestions and legal counsel. If you are on the other side you will be the one getting yelled at and are losing more than you can ever imagine. She's absurd. Go watch and you'll see.

Other

Comment #: CA5157
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Horrendous Judge. This is the only Judge I have ever seen in a courtroom suggest the grounds for the Plaintiffs objections while at the same time did not offer the same legal aid to the Defense. Highly improper behavior for a Judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5108
Rating:6.3
Comments:
Very evenhanded. Can have a temper and be difficult to deal with, but generally acts and rules fairly. Law and motion in front of her takes forever as she controls the proceedings and cuts off lawyers. But she lets you try your case and is fair.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5078
Rating:3.1
Comments:
Miss Murphy turned a 7 hour injunction hearing into a 5 day capital trial. After the Plaintiff's put on 3 full days of nonsense time her patience was so thins she only allowed 2 witnesses to appear for the Defense. She used an arrest that had not gone to trial against the defendant - me - then proceeded to reign a sentence of terror on me with no mercy. She used double hearsay as credible evidence and granted plaintiff's injunction. I can't drive down parts of Wilshire boulevard because the street needs protection from me, along with two buildings, one I've never been to and even the one where I live(d). I'm homeless now because of this cunt which under California Law is illegal because you cannot evict someone with a permanent injunction. But Judge Murphy does not know that and even if she does she doesn't give a shit. She's Nancy Grace with a gavel.

Other

Comment #: CA5070
Rating:1.0
Comments:
After experience "justice" at the hands of "Judge" Murphy, I believe she does great disservice to the courts of Los Angeles. Having 148 peremptory challenges between 2001 and 2003, and hearing from others in the law community confirming that she isn't the brightest seed, I feel safe in that belief. Be wary of her. You will not feel justice was had in her courtroom. Sit down and watch. You'll see.

Other

Comment #: CA4850
Rating:10.0
Comments:
She is a great judge. All of the negative comments here appear to be from a single source. She is as good as it gets, and is well-liked at USC.

Other

Comment #: CA4473
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
She is just plain mean-spirited, abrasive and rude. I have never seen a more biased or inconsiderate judge in all the years that I have been working in the courts. She's a disgrace to the courts. It was the most stressful trial I have ever been a part of, because everyone, including the jury, was afraid to even sneeze or breathe, for fear of her constant condescending rants. Pretty sad.

Litigant

Comment #: CA4382
Rating:1.0
Comments:
She appears to go into the courtroom with a predisposed attitude towards the litigants and their representatives. She is a terrible judge that does a disservice to the court.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA3660
Rating:4.6
Comments:
An unpleasant judge to all. Rants at counsel with clients present. Smart enough. Fair enough. But entirely lacking in judicial temperament. Trial in her courtroom is an ordeal.

Court Staff

Comment #: CA3287
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Im not a lawyer, so I can't comment whether her rulings were correct or not, but as a fellow human being ---- she is NASTY rude and pompous! "what is it now?" "what's your problem now?" are the responses I got when I asked for clarification. likes to belittle people. just so unnecessarily MEAN.

Litigant

Comment #: CA2734
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Fair and honest

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2720
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Unforgivably rude to an older attorney who was trying to apologize to her for his difficulty in hearing her during a case management conference. I will forever regret that I did not file a complaint with the council on judicial performance. She is unfit for the job of Superior Court Judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2357
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Terrible judge -- as bad as it gets.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2164
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Extremely rude. Disrespectful. Horrible temper. Egotistical. Will not let you speak even on a germane issue. Ridicules counsel attempting to embarrass them in front of others.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1952
Rating:1.4
Comments:
Very nasty person and not at all intelligent. Some judges remind you why you like the practice of law, other judges, like this judge, make law practice seem like a depressing waste of time. It would be nice to see judges like this stop all the horrible attitude and just do their job like everyone else.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1924
Rating:9.8
Comments:
This judge is smart, prepared and even handed. She will do the work necessary to rule on complex matter.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1708
Rating:1.5
Comments:
Rude, overweening, unjudicial in temperament. Does not research the issues, flip-flops on oral argument and sometimes is so unprepared she conducts research right in front of the lawyers when the matter is called. Seems to care more about the form of filings (did you remember to tab exhibits??) than the content.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1503
Rating:2.3
Comments:
This judge's style includes ridiculing and berating counsel, often without any justification. She refuses to reconsider a position, even if all parties agree she is wrong. She finds fictional paperwork errors in order to avoid ruling on a motion. She sets OSC re: Sanctions anytime she is mad. If you file a lengthy motion, she will find a reason not to hear the merits and she will try to humiliate you for nebulous "errors." She is simply horrible.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA1121
Rating:7.0
Comments:
I conducted two bench trials with her. This goes back at least ten years. They were easier than normal to schedule on fast-track. You see, most lawyers 170 challenged before waking up for court in the morning. Her awful disposition distracted my presentations but the outcomes were still based on her solid understanding of the facts, witness credibility issues, and the law.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1109
Rating:5.2
Comments:
This judge is needlessly abrasive, firing rapid shot questions at counsel, interrupting with another question before counsel can answer the prior question. Ultimately seems to know what she is doing, however.