Hon. Amy M. Pellman See Rating Details
Superior Court
Los Angeles County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   5.5 - 2 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   8.0 - 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. Amy M. Pellman


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA8714
The best! remains contected, attentive, and personable.


Comment #: CA2226
She seems fair & has been patient explaining in detail as to the facts and she did grant continuances. She seems to know the laws, She is simply doing her job and I feel she's trying to do her best.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1406
In my opinion, this judicial officer should not be on the bench. In one case, she completely ignored prevailing case law and the facts of the case that do not fit into her rulings even though those facts are material. She renders decisions which are needlessly very costly to litigants appearing before her. She cites cases to support her rulings which actually hold just the opposite to what she claims. She appears very biased, such that once she makes up her mind as to who she wants to prevail, there is no swaying her. She forces litigants to jointly hire experts and then refuses to accept the experts analysis. She does not have the proper judicial temperament and should be avoided at all costs.