Hon. Linda S. Marks See Rating Details
Superior Court
Orange County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   3.7 - 6 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   10.0 - 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      

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)

What others have said about Hon. Linda S. Marks


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA9864
I'm in trial right now in front of this judge and she is an outstanding judge. Spends her time knowing the issues. She knows the rules of evidence and tries very hard to be even handed. Definitely one of the best judges I've ever been in front of. She cuts the plaintiffs counsel some breaks but can't blame her because they are less experienced. Can't say I like it but do understand. So she is working very hard to ensure a fair trial. I'm super impressed. Totally do not understand others comments that she is condescending. I've not seen that although I have gotten some stern remarks a few times and deserved it. She is respectful of counsels time and the juries time. She controls her courtroom well while making sure you can put on your case. What I will say is that she does not suffer fools so be prepared and be respectful. If you do these things you will not get a better or more fair judge out there. I really wonder who is making this poor comments about her and wonder if there is not some sexism going on. I have found too often that female judges that are stern and strong are considered "condescending" or even worse whereas are male are just considered strong. Unfortunate for these negative comments because a judge who clearly respects the position and power she holds and who works this hard to be fair does not deserve this negative treatment in my opinion. I do not find at all that she thinks highly of herself. But I will say she exudes confidence which she backs up in the courtroom. And I will add that when I first appeared in front of her I appeared with a male associate 15 years older than me and I disliked what I saw as some immediate presumptions by her of my ability and my station in life because I appeared with a man much older than me. But I will tell you that over the course of this trial she has completely changed my opinion. Yes I think she presumed that my associate 15 years older than me was teaching me the ropes and that he was first chair in the trial which he was not But I have been in front of a lot of judges and she is fabulous in trial. In all the reviews of judges I have ever read have I ever seen a male judge be reviewed with a "he thinks highly of himself." Maybe she does think highly of herself but you know what, she should because she is 1) smart 2) capable 3) kind and understanding 4) and deserving of so much more than these negative reviews. Seriously if you are an experienced trial lawyer who wants a judge who understands the law, understands the rules of evidence, and treats you and your jury with respect while allow you to put on your case, you will not get any better. If you are a female lawyer in front of her assume she will presume you are not as capable as the men in the room But if you spend some time in front of her and show her you know what you are doing, you will earn her respect. My trial is still underway but I will say that I would try another case in front of her in a heartbeat.


Comment #: CA9862
This judge was eloquent and on top of everything. Very respectful to all parties and represented the court in the best way possible.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8435
This judge must be in competition for worst superior court judge. The anger and condescension aimed at the attorneys is second to none. What makes matters worse is she will not take the time to learn. Further, her knowledge of the law is poor and she seems not to have a clue what the ramifications of some of her rulings. Lastly, she shows no inclination of improving in any way. Definitely stay away if you can.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6661
Worst judge in California. She has a close relationship with Farmers insurance lawyers. She never rules against them on anything. She hates people who are not insurance defense lawyers. Very hateful and condescending.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5147
Nasty temperament and slow on the uptake. Conceited, wants counsel to be extremely deferential to her at all times. A complete boor. Has ugly nasty clerk and courtroom assistant as well.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4972
I have had many cases with Judge Marks. She can be brutal to attorneys if you do anything, however slight, to get on her bad side.

She has a clerk who does all of the reading and research on law and motion matters. He sits pro tem for her when she is out. He has a high opinion of himself.

I do not agree with all of the rulings that I get from this judge, but the majority of the time her rulings at least make some sense (which is more than can be said for many of her colleagues). Sometimes she gets it right. I don't think that I've ever gotten something out of left field from her. I've definitely had some issues go against me that I think I should have won.

Overall, she is middle-of-the-road. She has a poor judicial temperament, but is adequately intelligent, with no overt bias. You can do better, but you can also do much worse. I would not paper her, because you will probably end up with someone worse.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1840
I generally like Orange County Central Justice Center but this judge is an exception. She and her clerk are ignorant nasty time wasters. You can find yourself going around and around and around with them; nothing gets done but you get a lot of attitude.