"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Michael P. Vicencia	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Los Angeles County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 3.6 - 24 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 12 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. Michael P. Vicencia

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA55089
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
LOL he and the opposing counsel pretended to put on trial. It was so obvious. He wouldn't admit none of our evidence. Twisted and bent the rules. Their secret language wasn't so secret. They were both horrible actors. I thought he might be upstanding judge that would follow the rules, [Redacted by Ed.]

Litigant

Comment #: CA54355
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This is by far one of the rudest judges I have ever encountered. I believe he violated my constitutional rights. Form 170.6 is in order every time you may need to come in front of this horrible judge. On a 1-10 rating scale he deserves at 0.

Litigant

Comment #: CA53826
Rating:1.0

Comments:
The witness list went nearly the same way and he stated that I couldn’t serve my own witness subpoena, despite the court’s official website stated the opposite. Yes, not all the witnesses were successfully served and not all the proofs of service were filed, but he excused at least one crucial witness and refused to issue a warrant for her arrest, nor would he postpone the trial until I submit exhibits by PDF or subpoena the witnesses.
Judge Vicencia, despite his deceiving statements, didn’t and wouldn’t impress me. I have been screwed by judges before and I Had lost faith in the legal system decades ago.
Tomorrow I will present my trial brief, accompanied by the legal argument and I will attempt to explain to a jury of 12. If Mr. Coons keep interrupting and objecting and if judge Vicencia keeps sustain or if he decides to convince or twist the jury’s findings, I would know that I was right all along.
Last part (to be continued tomorrow, June 4th 2024)
Edward Moore.
(818)693-1280
adamx2@yahoo.com

Litigant

Comment #: CA53825
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Part 4
Since my initial exchange was under emergency, I prepared four folders of identical exhibits and brought them to court this morning. Judge Vicencia refused to allow the exhibits because he claimed that he would hold me to an attorney standard, me being In Pro Per, and that his rules or court riles necessitated submitting the additional exhibits in PDG format!

No amount of argument could convince him. Further and as expected, he denied almost every document I had previously exchanged and kept questioning me about relevance, while he admitted almost every document which the offices of Menke presented on behalf of my landlord.

Litigant

Comment #: CA53824
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Parr 3
Later I discovered that judge Vicencia had already denied my preemptory challenge and set the trial in a few days. When I appeared again for the Final Status Conference on Friday, two days before trial, I proceeded to explain to judge Vicencia how I wished he would grant me the wish to change courtrooms due to my perception of bias and my challenge for him presiding over my trial might influence his decision. He went on with the usual rhetoric of him not knowing who I was, not remembering anything outside of the case, etc. I told him that we were human and were bound to bias. There is nothing I could do; I was stuck with him. I remember an attorney once telling me: “ if a judge wanna screw you, he will always find a way”. This is exactly how I feel about judge Vicencia.

Today Monday the 3d, we appeared before him. I had exchanged some exhibits and witnesses with opposing counsel in the very short time I had and agreed with opposing counsel that both have the right to add exhibits and witnesses.

Litigant

Comment #: CA53823
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Part 2
When I first appeared in dept 26 and upon opening my mouth to tell the staffer that I was there for an eviction, the staffer rushed to “shush” me and ordered me to sit down. I told him that I wasn’t his child or his dog to address me like that and that I was rather a 59 year-old man. The staffer called two sheriff deputies, they walked through the courtroom, went to the back toward the chambers and disappeared for a few minutes than returned and sat in the back. When judge Vicencia came out of his chambers and as 170.6 states, I proceeded to address him with my concerns of bias in his courtroom before he started with his calendar. He ordered me to sit down and be quit. I shouted 170.6, exited the courtroom and went to the forms window where I ordered, filled and filed a 170.6.

Litigant

Comment #: CA53822
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Part 1

I am in trial in Dept 26 now and will be going back tomorrow, Tuesday June 4th. I was in judge Vicencia’s courtroom for a previous eviction case as a defendant/tenant. I had borrowed $3,000 and sold a vehicle in order to pay Basta, Long Beach’s local tenant defense firm to represent me. I am disabled, on social security, I have two minor children at home and their mother cannot legally work. We struggle to survive. After we prevailed in our eviction case this judge refused or decided not to award us attorney fees. He also seemed to struggle to rule in our favor, possibly due to the fact that the opposing counsel, Coons, works for the Menke law firm, Menke being an attorney who serves sometime as a temporary judge and who, very likely, seems to have a good relationships with Long Beach courthouse judges.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA53334
Rating:1.0

Comments:
[Redacted by Ed.] His ego is out of control. He berates attorneys over issues most judges handle with grace. Avoid this courtroom at all costs. He is unreasonable on the calendar and will force you to trial calendar before the defendants even appear. He issues OSCs for the most trivial issues. Very ego driven. Talks about himself way too long on the stand. It's excruciating.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA52764
Rating:9.1

Comments:
I handle quite a few cases in the Los Angeles Superior Courts, and getting Judge Vicencia for the first time was like a breath of fresh air. He starts his calendar on time; he moves through his calendar expeditiously; and he schedules trials the way the Legislature mandated. He's tough on attorneys, but only if he thinks they're wasting the Court's time.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA51395
Rating:8.5

Comments:
I’ve handled a couple of trials in front of Judge Vicencia. He does always rule in my favor, but his rulings are generally well reasoned.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA49698
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I do not take criticism of Judicial Officers lightly; however, AVOID THIS JUDGE LIKE THE PLAGUE.

He is rigid, inflexible, uncooperative, rude and just downright MEAN. He is also prone to juvenile temper tantrums from the Bench.

The Judicial Council likely had HIM in mind when it codfied CCP Section 170.6.

Litigant

Comment #: CA41142
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Admitted he was unfamiliar with HOA law, friendly with plaintiff attorney established at the beginning of trial, biased toward plaintiff, did not read any of the filings except as required during court. Interrupted defendant's counsel continuously, said he didn't want to hear from specific defense witnesses, ruled unfairly, awarded attorneys fees above the prevailing party's costs. Made me lose faith in a fair system.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA22585
Rating:2.5

Comments:
This judge is about as dishonest and sold-out a judge as I have ever seen in over 20 years of practice. He makes wrong rulings, then employs ridiculous straw-man arguments persuading you to swallow his rulings. I plan to appeal him as soon as this case is over.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA20687
Rating:9.9

Comments:
Just finished a trial and thought the judge was fair and well read. He has a lot of common sense in my opinion, as well as "street smarts." Unclear what outcome will be, but feel both sides were heard fairly

Other

Comment #: CA20553
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
i was a witness for a friend in case that recently ended, and so no decision has been made yet...very impressed with this judge...win or lose i feel he is a fair, well read judge..

Litigant

Comment #: CA15303
Rating:8.0

Comments:
A very interesting judge who transforms when donning the robe . A very thorough judge who does not trivialize any case . He takes no bs and hates liars and could be severely harsh almost frightening at one moment and super nice the next . He was hard on me at the beginning but when it was all over and did everything I had to and them some he stopped the courtroom and waived me with my wife to his chambers for coffee and cake and was very lovely and warm an experience I will never forget

Other

Comment #: CA13384
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Clearly favors plaintiffs. Unfair. Rude. Erratic. Disrespectful. Biased.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA13106
Rating:8.6

Comments:
I ended up in this court unwittingly and was nervous as a result of these reviews. This was NOT my experience. I found Judge Vicencia smart with a case specific knowledge of wage and hour law of all things. He was fair but tough on anyone unprepared or inclined to babble on. He argued the opposite position with each lawyer. He made quick work of a trial and was compassionate and polite to the client. If your on the right side of your case and well prepared, I would choose him on any occasion.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12988
Rating:8.0

Comments:
I read the other comments here and was concerned that I had not papered Judge Vicencia. But after having my first substantive hearing with him and observing his conduct with other counsel in other matters before ours was called, I didn't see anything that would give me concern.

Opposing counsel had late filed a brief just one court day prior, and he had clearly still taken the time to read through it and give it fair consideration. He went out of his way to ensure there was no prejudice and listened with real consideration to my arguments.

Perhaps there's another side that I didn't see, but from my experience Judge Vicencia's demeanor was nothing like what has been described in some of the other comments.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12879
Rating:1.1

Comments:
Never go before this judge without a court reporter!

Other

Comment #: CA12631
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Just for the sake of truth and accuracy, the critical comments of this judge unfortunately are true. It hurts our system of justice, but it must be told. The positive comments, the few there are, must be related to something other than the truth, a relationship, favors etc..

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12518
Rating:1.0

Comments:
BEWARE- The below comments are all accurate. This man is not willing to hear any oral argument. He doesn't issue tentative rulings. Your better off not making an oral argument because once his mind is set, citing to pertinent case law goes over his head. Good luck to you.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12452
Rating:2.1

Comments:
The negative comments and criticisms are on point. I've never been the subject of his ridicule or tirades but have had to sit through a number of his calendars. He should know better. An embarrassment to the bench.

Litigant

Comment #: CA12212
Rating:1.0

Comments:
He doesn't have the wherewithall to stand in the courts as a person who is sensible and cordial nor does he exhibit a fairness in his rulings and decisions. He allows defense litigants to speak nonsense and takes it for fact erroneously. He is unconscionable and not fit for the bench to be a Trier of fact.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10730
Rating:7.3

Comments:
As many below have noted, this judge is VERY no-nonsense, and does not suffer for fools. During oral argument, he will make sure both sides are heard, but will cut directly to the chase to let you know his tentative ruling, and focus your arguments on the questions he has with regards to his position. I personally liked this trait, but I am sure that many attorneys would rather try to distract him by merely reciting the contents of their motions. Those who do, however, will be cut-off, and will do so at their own peril.

The one major issue I have with Judge Vicencia is his complete inflexibility with scheduling in his cases. His docket is absolutely jam-packed, and it takes over half of a year to get anything heard in his courtroom. It is clear he is willing to do anything he can to dispose of his cases. While this can be a noble endeavor, he takes it to an extreme. During my most recent case with him, he set trial mere weeks after the scheduled demurrer hearing date, making it impossible to file a coherent MSJ. When the Plaintiff was granted leave to amend their complaint, we had to go in ex parte to continue the trial again...but he once again set the trial date to be almost immediately after the new demurrer hearing date. When I advised him that would not be sufficient time to file a coherent MSJ (as you are statutorily entitled to do), he simply retorted "then take the case to trial! I don't understand why attorneys are so afraid to try cases nowadays!" Sorry judge, that just isn't what the law says. I was thankfully able to dispose of the case on demurrer, but the way he handles his calendar will definitely increase your stress level a few notches.

I also saw a couple of attorneys appearing ex parte on the case before mine who had stipulated to continue the trial date due to a substitution of counsel a few weeks before trial (and who had not yet conducted discovery because of dispositive motions in the case). He completely lit into them, and summarily denied their request. My only word of advice with Vicencia is don't expect any favors from him related to scheduling, and get your discovery done in the case ASAP. If you don't, you will be up a creek without a paddle.

Overall, I think this judge is good at cutting through the BS, and getting to the heat of the meat in the case. But, he will put you over a barrel when it comes to his calendar. It may not be your fault that it takes 9 months to get a hearing in his courtroom, but he will certainly act like it is.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA9510
Rating:9.5

Comments:
I have read the scathing comments of Judge Vicencia and strongly disagree. I have been before him numerous times as have my law partners. We all consider him to be a very intelligent and fair judge. The only attorneys I've seen him berate are, frankly, inept, disingenuous, or woefully unprepared counsel. Since many LA Superior judges give such counsel a pass more often than not, I can understand how Judge Vicencia would be a shock to such counsel as he holds them fully accountable for their conduct and the conduct of their clients. If you intend to engage in unethical, unlawful, or even simply boorish conduct, then Judge Vicencia will be a terrible wake up call for you.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8951
Rating:1.0

Comments:
To be avoided if any sense of court decorum, civility or legal acumen is important to your case.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7360
Rating:1.0

Comments:
An astonishingly poor judge. Unprepared. Not smart. Volatile. It is as if a gigantic child has reached the bench and now functions there with all of the legal acumen of a precocious 12-year old. Justice is not served by his presence on the bench.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6655
Rating:1.1

Comments:
Incredibly, the man has not an iota of legal acumen. And, he has no ability to fathom a legal argument. I would feel sorry for him except for the fact that he makes a mockery of our system. Period.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6596
Rating:1.8

Comments:
Likely appointed for his father's political connections. Terrible judicial temperament. Ill prepared. An embarrassment.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA6339
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This is one situation where the below comments are fairly accurate. Complete lack of a proper judicial temperament-period.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5763
Rating:1.0

Comments:
As others have said, he is certainly rude, impatient, and arrogant. More troubling, however, is his astonishingly poor understanding of or the law. He should not be on the bench.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA5036
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Vicencia is in Long Beach. He used to be in dept 8. He gives no priority to private counsel. He'll hear pro pers before he hears private counsel's matters.

He is robe heavy. He was papered by the public defender's office. He has a temper. He shouldn't be on the bench.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA5027
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge is arrogant. A lot of attorneys paper him.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4909
Rating:1.3

Comments:
This judge was a complete jerk at the first CMC. I dumped him on a peremptory challenge. I've been around too long not to know that judges who are jerks early on only get worse as the case goes on.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4743
Rating:1.1

Comments:
This judge is openly unfair and biased, and should not be allowed to adjudicate matters. His ability to hold political judicial council positions allows him to abuse the law and misrepresent the integrity of the court. He openly shows favoritism for larger corporations and/or institutions, which taints the integrity of the court.

Litigant

Comment #: CA4742
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Vicencia boasts of his favoritism, bias and judicial abuse. He yells, screams, and openly punishes persons (and cases) that he dislikes. He is very politically active in the judicial arena, and therefore favors large corporate institutions in cases. He openly supports such abuses as meeting with opposing counsel in ex parte hearings without notice to the party that he despises -- he refuses to admonish them for horrific abuses and imposes sanctions without a motion. He will literally do the opposing counsel's work for them. He is utterly corrupt!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4545
Rating:2.9

Comments:
"Impatient" and "sarcastic" are accurate comments. This judge has little regard for the rule of law. Judge Vicencia's own law applies in his courtroom. He should have run for office like his father. He does litigants a real disservice.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4120
Rating:3.4

Comments:
Impatient and sarcastic. Acts as if his court is the major concern of those who control the judicial budget. He uses sarcasm to disguise his ignorance of the law.