Hon. Maria Puente-Porras See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 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


Please type what you see below:

    

What others have said about Hon. Maria Puente-Porras


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA33277
Rating:1.0
Comments:
When she was a commissioner in Torrance, I had the extreme misfortune of encountering Puente-Porras. I'd had a minor fender-bender with a guy who then threatened me - and THEN filed 2 Elder Abuse Restraining Order requests against me - as well as complaints with the DMV and State Bar. After more than a year of fighting this malicious man, I not only beat all his malicious claims, I got a $30k settlement from him. But Puente-Porras dealt me an initial blow in that fight because she was so incompetent as a judicial officer. The guy had very clearly expressed he was a resident of Nevada. It is a fundamental element of California's Elder Abuse Laws that they only apply to Elders who reside in California. So because of Puente-Porras' incompetence, she granted his TRO request. When an Elder Abuse Restraining Order is granted, the person against whom it is granted loses their 2nd Amendment rights and I had to surrender my shotgun and rifle to the police. Despite my being able to defeat a "permanent" restraining order by pointing out Puente-Porras' incompetence, it was months before I could clear the hurdles to have my 2nd Amendment rights restored. She is emblematic of the incompetence of LASC judicial officers.