"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Gregory Wilson Alarcon	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Los Angeles County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 3.5 - 17 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 1 rating(s)	Please send me alerts on this judge E-mail Address:

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address ()

* *

Confirm E-mail Address

* * *

Zip

Occupation

Add a comment only

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:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. Gregory Wilson Alarcon

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA54307
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Terrible judge, an embarrassment to the LA Superior Court. He's lazy in the extreme, dumb, rude, all in all a real nightmare. 170.6 him or you'll regret not having done it.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA52738
Rating:1.1

Comments:
Alarcon is the biggest phony on the L.A. Superior Court bench. He is lazy in the extreme, not very bright, intemperate, irritable, biased, bored with his job--in short, he is a huge embarrassment to the Los Angeles Superior Court. Just an unpleasant human being and a horrible judge!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA51463
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Alarcon is lazy, he doesn't read pleadings, he is biased, he is not smart, his staff is petty and rude. I tell everyone to 170.6 him, regardless if you are a plaintiff or defendant.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA46981
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I still shudder when I remember him -- he left to go to another department about halfway through my case. He seemed fairly smart, but moderately lazy, a freakish shrew for a clerk, and he made some real errors in rulings (e.g., he granted a motion to compel me for IME for body parts that were not part of any litigation -- defendant settled with me so it became moot, but it was a huge error on this judge's part).

Other

Comment #: CA39400
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He has an excellent disposition. I have Asperger's and he was always calm and kind, letting me speak fully in every hearing. He ruled against me at times, and a couple of his rulings made no sense (granting motion to compel med exam of things not in Demand and not part of litigation - which he acknowledged he had gotten wrong, after the fact), but he had key rulings in my favor and put the corrupt opposing counsel in his place more than once. His clerk, however, Mason, is an absolute bully, lies to cover herself, and makes so many errors.

Other

Comment #: CA38828
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Doesn't know the law. Laughs during proceedings and depends on his staff for all answers. Doesn't pay attention nor has a clue what's going on. Very dangerous and should not have this job.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA37021
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I know Judge Alarcon, and a lot of these opinions are off base. He simply does not believe in long reasoned explanations. But he is quite knowledgeable about the law, and knows evidence very well, has probably already ruled on it in his mind before the objection is out of your mouth. Judge Alarcon recoils at confrontation, and for that reason people may get the wrong impression that he is dumb or soft. It's not true that his judicial assistant rules for him, though it is true she is brassy and appears to run things. He cares a great deal about "civility" and pre-trial preparation, but he is too civil himself to make any cutting remark, to put anyone in their place, so people in his courtroom get the mistaken impression that they can be obnoxious. That would impress him.
It is true that he is conservative, meaning that he instinctively views plaintiffs as grabby and duplicitous. So he might tend to grant defense motions more readily. But he loves the showmanship of a trial, and if you come before him to try your case seriously with a good amount of preparation, he will give anyone a fair chance.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA36811
Rating:1.3

Comments:
HE'S NOT SMART, LAZY, BAD TEMPERMENT, AND A MUST FOR 170.6 FOR BOTH PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANTS. HE SHOULD BE RECALLED.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA36766
Rating:3.0

Comments:
Read the 2012 Met News piece before forfeiting your chance to ticket. The judge was unfailingly polite, but did not seem to know what was going on.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA25447
Rating:2.1

Comments:
Apathetic and incompetent would be the two words that immediately come to mind when describing Judge Alarcon. He engages in a vicious cycle of being idiotic, and then supporting his idiocy with total obliviousness. My theory is that he is a straight nihilist and believes that the more destruction he creates the better he has served society. It is malpractice not to paper this judge. Upshot is that he has a great temperament and will pretend to listen to you instead of getting mad if you challenge his reasoning.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10748
Rating:1.7

Comments:
It is unfortunate that this man is sitting on the bench. Standard operating procedure in my small firm is to 170.6 him no matter which side we are taking. His demeanor, his ability to comprehend anything that's going on, and his refusal to read papers are at the very bottom of judges that I have been in front of in my 53 years of practice. Enough is enough. He is a disgusting example of everything that's wrong with our court system and it is disgraceful that he is allowed to continue on and on and on. And if you really want to know what I really think, try a case in front of him.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6033
Rating:1.4

Comments:
The man is a non-starter. I have been a lawyer for more than 40 years, and I have to say that even grumpy judges don't bother me. But, where to these dopes come from? How does a lawyer like this get to be a judge? And who is supplying his PR to this site? Those positive reviews are laughable.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5551
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
3/2/4 wrote:

"Rating:2.4
Comments:
I held off. Whoever is writing the new and detailed comments certainly has a lot of time to wax positive about a very, very bad judge. Why do non-lawyers get to comment?"

The same person who writes his opinions is probably adding disinformation. Even attys who prevail know he's incompetent. He's some type of Stepford Judge

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4903
Rating:2.4

Comments:
I held off. Whoever is writing the new and detailed comments certainly has a lot of time to wax positive about a very, very bad judge. Why do non-lawyers get to comment?

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4902
Rating:8.9

Comments:
Judge Alarcon has great self-control, handles his courtroom in a dignified and even-handed manner, and his rulings on evidence are intelligent and solid. He does not engage in personal attacks on parties or counsel. His consideration of legal issues reflects excellent study, analysis and good judgment. I have found Judge Alarcon's courtroom clerk to be very helpful. She will go out of her way for you, in order to cut through bureaucracy. She is patently impatient with incompetent people -- in particular, bad lawyers.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4869
Rating:6.9

Comments:
I call this guy a "lawyer's judge." He is a very nice guy, who is flexible almost to a fault. He also is the type of judge where oral argument actually matters, and I have seen him switch rulings from his tentative based on oral argument, so, a hint: prep for it.

His clerk does seem moderately crazy, but she is the type who, if you treat her well, she will treat you well, unless your ex parte is inane and she is saving you time. She basically is the filter to get in front of him, and she takes that job very seriously. She is definitely someone who could take a lesson in "chilling out," but I'm sure that's what he told her to do.

He definitely is not "prompt" or "hardworking," given that he usually took the bench the few times that I appeared in front of him twenty to thirty minutes late. That being said, I would like most of my cases to get assigned to him if I had the choice, given some of the other options in Stanley Mosk.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4615
Rating:9.6

Comments:
I recently tried a very difficult case in front of Judge Alarcon. My experience makes me very skeptical of the negative reviews. His clerk, [redacvted], while brisk, runs an efficient courtroom and has the thankless job of controlling what is otherwise the usually very bad behavior of attorneys. Judge Alarcon is a non-interventionist judge who lets you try your case. When you ask him to call balls and strikes he does so, quickly and evenhandedly. He was instrumental in ensuring an efficient trial, and was more than helpful in encouraging what was thought to be an impossible settlement while the jury was deliberating. In my opinion, he did not choose sides and was quite well-versed on the complex legal issues, and literally did research from the bench while we were debating special jury instructions. I hate to say it, but many of the negative comments smell of sour grapes. Sometimes, you deserve to lose. The moral of the story: respect his clerk and know and follow the rules. His courtroom will not tolerate the shenanigans that many lawyers are accustomed to perpetrating.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3437
Rating:8.4

Comments:
Very even tempered smart judge. Let's you try your case.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA3008
Rating:3.4

Comments:
If you are on his good side, you luck out.
He seems to care. Frankly, he could care less about the outcome of a case. That is his problem. Because he says nothing, you will think he actually is listening.

Terrible judge to be in front of the jury bc juries believes his Mister Rogers attitude. You get him on your bad side, jury will go that way as well. Even when he is wrong.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2651
Rating:2.4

Comments:
Doesn't read papers. Just sits and listens to arguments on motions, nodding his head as if he understands what's going on. Research attorney decides motions. Courtroom clerk is rude and domineering.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2607
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Let's you try your case. Allows you to pick your jury. Don't get on his bad side.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA1092
Rating:2.6

Comments:
No idea how he managed to get on the bench much less stay here. Lazy and intellectually devoid of legal ability.