Hon. Richard F. Walmark See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.3 - 11 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   3.0 - 12 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. Richard F. Walmark


Comments


Other

Comment #: CA5909
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge is biased and unfair. He based his decision on how you look, body language, ethnicity, and how you live. We presented our proof and yet we still lost. Unbelievable indeed!

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA5902
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge is an unbelievable mockery of the justice system. He was very one sided for the defense. Refused to even look at my evidence and was rude and curt. A disgrace in a robe.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5901
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This Judge is unbelievable. He starts by ranting about his glory days in college as an athlete and his personal life and even cracked a few jokes that none laughed at. This judge presided over the appeals of my small claims case. In the initial case, I was awarded everything I asked for which was only $167 plus $500 punitive. This appeals judge reversed the decision and gave me $0. I explained that my credit was being negatively affected as well as my livelihood as a result of false claims made to the credit bureaus from a previous landlord. This judge is not only a joke but racist as well.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5885
Rating:1.0
Comments:
How does a loser like this become a judge?

Litigant

Comment #: CA5884
Rating:1.0
Comments:
A total moron who loves the sound of his own voice and knows less law than a gangbanger. Has actually enteted orders for people to break the law; cannot discern/comprehend complex evidence. Not even fit for small claims bench. Watch out for this idiot; a complete disgrace and embarrassment to any court of law.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5406
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He gave a long winded speech about looking out into the gallery and sizing them up before their case was heard. And that he bases his decision not on evidence or what you say, but body.language. this has nothing to do with whether a judgment comes in my favor or not. A court of law is not a place for subjectivity. It's shocking he's been a judge this long. He needs to be removed.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5404
Rating:1.0
Comments:
He is absolutely crazy and should be thrown off the bench. He gives a 30 minute speech on himself and the lack of time for cases. And how he was the best in the county as far as quantity of cases and reminisces of how he was 'upstairs' in limited jurisdiction. On and on. It's shocking that he's been doing this for a while without being dumped. He doesn't follow law, he says he responds more to body language than what you say. That statement in itself is cause for an appeal.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5354
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Completely Biased and unfair. He had a predisposition to tell the courtroom he knew who was guilty before hearing a single case by looks alone. He also stated plaintiffs are usually looking to win the lottery or get a vegas trip out of their hearing. Unbelievable. I will be contacting the commission of judicial performance and the governors office. Clearly Judge Walmark has a prejudice against plaintiffs and should not be handling these cases as he doesn't know how to be impartial. I hope more people follow suit and file formal complaints against him.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5353
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I have never seen a judge tell the entire courtroom that he was judging them and knew who was guilty by looking at them before any case was heard and any evidence was presented. This was a travesty. This is a clear case of a man taking liberties with his position of power and does not present the people with a forum to have a fair and just hearing.

Other

Comment #: CA5321
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This judge lacks common sense, and has no ability to process information in a court room setting. What a shame that we have such an incompetent person handling any court matters.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5250
Rating:10.0
Comments:
My experience with judge Walmark restored my faith in the legal system. He definitely does consider EVERYTHING.... temperaments, demeanor, inconsistencies in testimony and validity of evidence as all judges should but many don't care enough to put that much into their work. So for those who show up in court with an attitude or falsified evidence...beware! Judge Walmark has more depth than most and reads through things to find the truth. Wish more judges cared as much as he does.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA5249
Rating:1.6
Comments:
The most unreasonable biased judge we have ever seen.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5247
Rating:2.0
Comments:
HE refuses to look at evidence. HE supports big business at all costs.
He is very rushed and turns to sarcasm and repeat personal bench comments in order to get to his ruling[s].
He admits from the bench that he thinks he is omnipotent and says he looks
at the person not the information at bar.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5241
Rating:2.0
Comments:
If you're a defendant, good luck with this judge. He doesn't look at any evidence presented and in my hearing he ignored the few documents that proved my case (wouldn't even look at them) and awarded far too much to the plaintiff who lied about everything and didn't make much of a case. If you're a defendant, most likely you'll have to appeal to have the evidence considered and to get an actual objective opinion rendered.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5139
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Hon. Richard F. Walmark was very professional and upfront on how he runs his court. He encouraged mediation and Hon. Walmark knew how to made us feel assured and relaxed. I was pleased with the judgment. Thank you, Hon. Walmark for making me feel that justice is restored.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5077
Rating:8.0
Comments:
He is a very no nonsense and fair judge. I realized how tough it is to be a good judge sitting in court all day and it was clear Judge Walmark scores high. I was a defendant and although he awarded plaintiff a small portion of what she was asking it was only because of state guidelines regarding the issue. He caught the plaintiff in a gross lie as he did other people that got up to plead their cases that day. And to that I say good job. I totally disagree with comment he is a tyrant. He gave people more chances to explain than I had patience to hear. I would have cut 90% of those people off in 5 seconds. Didn't find him angry but rather way too lenient with people's ridiculous and sometimes incomprehensible responses and explanations. If you get up in front of this judge be prepared and don't LIE.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA4691
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He talks and talks so much that I am surprised that he hasn't lost his voice. He appears to have good language skills, but unfortunately his courtroom is full of semi-morons. He is a tyrant and quite angry. Perhaps he should take up boxing, rather than pitting his anger against the litigants.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA4634
Rating:9.9
Comments:
As a mediator for over 30 years, I was recently very pleased with Judge Walmark's ability to accurately rule based on evidence provided, address questionable issues to get to the truth and apply his vast experience as a D.A. to delve into matters with objectivity. I look forward to working with him again.

Litigant

Comment #: CA4633
Rating:1.0
Comments:
It's frightening how some judges aren't removed from the bench. His decisions aren't based on law or even justice, but random bias. He is one of the worst judges in Van Nuys.

Litigant

Comment #: CA4542
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Coming from a family of attorneys and judges, and ending up in small claims court as a defendant, I had no idea what to expect from the sitting judge that I was assigned when I chose to wait for one. I was beyond impressed at the insightfulness and appropriate demeanor that I encountered with this judge. He is a rare find who sets an example for all judges to follow, and it truly was an honor to have such a positive experience in court!

Litigant

Comment #: CA4470
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Walmark lacks common sense, and his knowledge of the law is cursory at best. His rulings are biased and not based on fairness. He is horrible.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4308
Rating:1.1
Comments:
This judge is a dummy! It was a clear-cut contract case and he messed it up.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4299
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He bends over backwards to help tenants, in my opinion. I guess it's a liberal social movement here in the city of L.A. Maybe it's a courtroom game. The judge sounds like a "tuffy" but I believe that, in reality, he is probably a really nice guy. 99 to 100% of the defendants getting evicted are deadbeats and scamming the system.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA3920
Rating:8.0
Comments:
Judge Walmark recently took over the PM session of small claims in NWZ. At first I thought, "All right, this guy will be great. No BS." But, as someone has already stated, he goes on and on and on with his "lectures." Please, this place is packed with people. Let's get on with it.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA3288
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I don't know now this judge can reign over unlawful detainer cases when he in fact is losing his own home to foreclosure due to too much $$$ taken out.
Odd world we live in .

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3267
Rating:7.5
Comments:
Long winded and not the most efficient judge; however, he makes every effort to follow the law and gives each side an equal opportunity to argue their positions. He is fair, accomodating, and essentially what a judge is supposed to be. He is also a great trial judge. If you are a well prepared lawyer you will do well in front of him.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2984
Rating:1.4
Comments:
Judge Walmark is among the worst judges I have ever encountered. He lacks the intellectual ability required to make even routine decisions, and has turned the operation of his courtroom over to landlord attorneys who give the appearance to the public that they run the show. He is far too deferential to landlord attorneys, and at the same time seeks to embarrass tenants and their attorneys. Over the course of sitting in his courtroom for three days, I witnessed Judge Walmark ignore the law on case after case, and rely on landlord attorneys, opposite pro per tenants, to tell him what the law is. He even gave a speech at the outset one morning to all litigants advising them incorrectly on the law of the warranty of habitability. Judge Walmark may have been a fine criminal judge (I don't know) but he is ill suited for civil litigation of any kind.

Judge Walmark is the kind of judge that CCP 170.6 was written for.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2454
Rating:5.0
Comments:
Can be easily fooled