"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

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. Richard F. Walmark

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA55093
Rating:1.0

Comments:
As a Plaintiff I provided SOLID evidence with photos of how the accident happened. The Defendant totally perjued herself, took false photo of my auto & lied. Judge Richard Walmark denied my case. Is it a question of race-how can a woman of color drive a Mercedes? My auto was damaged by that girl, she knew I was about to upgrade to a 2024 model & also the Judge was told. How can this girl damage my auto but also cause body injury & get away it?

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA54981
Rating:8.8

Comments:
Very fair judge, to be honest, i was the plaintiff. and i still dont know his ruling, but the fact that he took over 45 minutes asking in depth questions about the case, trying to determine if the motion to quash had grounds to be approved or denied, shows that he IS actually motivated to determine cases in accordance with the law, more so than just personal bias. He was calm and patient with an obvious emotionally charged litigant in explaining in laymen terms what the procedure was requiring to determine if procedural service was in fact proper or not. Again, I'm still waiting for a ruling on that motion so this is a very honest opinion of his role as a judge, that is why i thought its best to share my experience prior to the decision, I'm kind of surprised at the other comments, but those seem more emotional based post judgement, rather than a view from an outsiders perspective. Keep up the good work

Litigant

Comment #: CA54980
Rating:9.0

Comments:
Very fair judge, to be honest i still dont know his ruling, but the fact that he took over 45 minutes asking in depth questions about the case, trying to determine if the motion to quash had grounds to be approved or denied, shows that he IS actually motivated to determine cases in accordance with the law, more so than just personal bias. He was calm and patient with an obvious emotionally charged litigant in explaining in laymen terms what the procedure was requiring to determine if procedural service was in fact proper or not. Again, I'm still waiting for a ruling on that motion so this is a very honest opinion of his role as a judge, that is why i thought its best to share my experience prior to the decision, Im kind of surprised at the other comments, but those seem more emotional based post judgement, rather than a view from an outsiders perspective. Keep up the good work

Other

Comment #: CA53314
Rating:10.0

Comments:
we feel Judge Walmark is very fair and listens to all the points that you need made. He is not in a hurry to finish with you.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA53004
Rating:9.0

Comments:
In my experience so far this judge knows how to make it look fair….so far so good ….

Litigant

Comment #: CA52706
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He needs to be retired for the well-being of the public, who have to file small claims cases in Van Nuys. He spends more time bragging about his career and how smart he rather than giving the cases in front of him the proper attention they require.

He also is heavily biased towards corporate or government entity defendants. He looks at non-corporate or non-entity Plaintiff’s as a nuisance, since he rarely lets them get a word in.

During my recent case he allowed the corporate defendant to introduce evidence they didn’t submit to me or the court prior to the hearing, which is against the rules, but Mr. Wallmark said he’d allow it. I highly doubt he would’ve granted me the same courtesy.

He also has a bad habit of litigating from the bench. Once he picks a side he’ll start arguing the case for that side, which is also improper.

I wouldn’t advise any non-corporate or non-entity plaintiff filing a small claims case at Van Nuys. You’d be better off paying more for limited civil and taking your chances than having to deal with Wallmark’s shenanigans.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA52240
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
What does sham Judge this is? He is not in the spirit of small claims court. It’s like a circus in his court sometimes. He allows people to be rude, and non-professional. He’s obviously very very biased, and that’s why he was demoted from seeing criminal cases . To small claims court. A lot of his rulings are over turned. This judge does not act in the spirit of small claims. And he’s a narcissist, and says the same thing over and over again, and just likes to talk about himself.

Other

Comment #: CA48931
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Shame to the court has Judge Walmark. Holy crap! This guy needs to be removed! This guy is incompetent beyond words! He's rude, insulting and dismissive. Absolutely 100% perversion of justice taking place in Courtroom. He perverts justice to fit his agenda. A perversion of justice beyond any reality I ever had prior to being in the courtroom he has turned into a lawless place. Very disturbing.
I highly advise people who are serious about saving this state and country to file complaints against him. You will get nowhere with those complaints, but they add up and over time will expel him as a parasitical public servant.

Litigant

Comment #: CA46742
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Holy crap! This guy needs to be removed! We were sued personally by a mentally ill woman & Walmark illegally added our company to the suit after the fact & found it liable. He denied our appeal to let the company defend itself! The Superior Court over-ruled him and the company got it's day in court and WON! This guy is incompetent beyond words! He's rude, insulting and dismissive. But worst of all, as proven in our case, he's just plain WRONG! AND you have to sit there and listen to him brag about himself endlessly. Filing a judicial complaint.

Court Staff

Comment #: CA44617
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Better yet, if ya all cannot stand Walmark just file your small claims in another court. In addition most judges are shit heads, lazy and could care less about any form of justice. They are just on the bench for a pay check because they couldn't make a living otherwise and SO EASY. These judges are guaranteed a paycheck for life. Don't have to look for clients nor rent an office space.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA42849
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Walmark will always be the smartest guy he knows so he is always the smarted guy in the courtroom. Beyond a condescending and nefarious demeanor is a Judge free from being held accountable for his words and actions. Knowing that small claims does not have to consider evidence he is a tyrant with no end in sight. Being that this is the Country of Los Angeles Superior Court it goes without saying corruption reigns supreme even in small claims. I highly advise people who are serious about saving this state and country to file complaints against him. You will get nowhere with those complaints but they add up and over time will expel him as a parasitical public servant.

Litigant

Comment #: CA42569
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I've lost trust in the Judicial system because of this judge He is biased and moody. He just picks the side that he likes better and then whatever you say is pointless. Very unfair person. Why this state allow him to be a Judge is beyond comprehension. Please retire him ASAP!

Litigant

Comment #: CA42182
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge was unreasonably biased; he absolutely goes with the biggest crybaby in small claims. He wastes a TON of time bragging on his time on the bench, and the thousands of cases he's adjudicated...and then does not follow the letter of the law. Who awards 90% of a simple LL/Tenant dispute?!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA40129
Rating:6.0

Comments:
The Judge awarded a case where i provided Evidence and Detailed following the Protocol rules of Evidence and Exchange- iam the Defendant Being Falsely accused by The Plaintiff which This fabrication was led to Plaintiff using the courts to harass me due to i left him and put child suport againts me now he makes up anything he can to his power= The saddest part is that The Judge seemed believe his verbal testomony instead of mine and im sure he did not go through the Evidence because i had all in there for defending my case and also i provided all based on protocol when the Plaintiff Did not. Also the Plaintiff gave inaccurate dates of occurence when i had my Evidence i even told the Judge that cant be true because i have A calendar with dates where shows that the time we visit for exchange took somewhere different based on what he told the Judge-& The Judge seemed not to take that Evidence into Proof of collection? Why ? Im not Guilty -He made up a story-He is the father of my son-Why will The Judge approve Grant a case where its untrue-i even spoke to a detective and the detective told me that anyone can make a false report on another party doesnt mean its taken to be believed and the detective also confirmed there was not incident report against me based on what the Plaintiff stated to me of information provided. This is unfair- The Judge did seem as a calm Judge and i noticed too that when the Plaintiff falsely accused me of something negative he will right away look at me-and deep inside i will feel like what do i do or say To my understanding in court we are suppose to remain calm and not speak or say anything until we get our turn to speak- So i was remaining calm but he kept starting at me like i dont know if trying to read me when Plaintiff accused me-Felt kind of awkward because what can i say if im not being the one giving statement -I just told him the Truth it was our son who took the phone-The phone was taken different places and i did return phone to police station because i chose to do the exchange there because the Plaintiff was accusing me of stealing his phone -he made up a story how i took it and i forgot to tell the Judge i was pragnet during those times and going through a medical tuff pragnency and i will never go out to get my son -my son will come straight inside which i did tell the judge its untrue- i have minute orders of me and plaintiff schedules which also proof what Plaintiff says are all Lies. Also i don't want to over think this but i was with plaintiff for about 10 years off and on-and i recall him mentioning that one of his friends name Rubio has a wife that works at Van Nuys as a clerk but i don't know name, not sure if this can be bias or if clerk will change anything which can lead to job risk so i doubt it but i think its important to mention that he HAS A FRIEND NAME RUBIO-HIS WIFE IS A CLERK AT THE VANNUYS COURT- I also noticed that Plaintiff also recently sued a party Adrian Ponce - with same Judge and got awarded through the case search site. The Plaintiff is a narcissist - i learned this in DV For victims - If you google the definition of narcissism you will see how these individuals are well trained manipulators and believable. Me and Plaintiff had our separate types of arguments where we both went off and on BUT BASED ON THIS INCIDENT HE IS ACCUSING ME ITS ALL FALSED AND I THINK ITS HIGHLY UNFAIR THAT I HAVE TO PAY A LARGE AMOUNT OF MONEY DUE TO THE LIES OF PLAINTIFF MADE UP CASES AND THE JUDGE NOT FAIRLY LOOKING INTO THIS. I HAD ALL MY EVIDENCE.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA39998
Rating:10.0

Comments:
I have been in front of so many judges and they seem to be getting worse with time but this is the second time I've been in front of Judge Walmark has the absolute best, gentle temperament and ability to decipher information provided accurately. I don't understand all these bad reviews. Some of these people need to go up in front of some of the other judges to understand how much they should be appreciating Judge Walmark

Litigant

Comment #: CA39997
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Second time I was in front of this judge and although I have not gotten the ruling yet, I found him to be incredibly patient with a very compassionate temperament again

Other

Comment #: CA39223
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I read all these complaints and it's really a shame. This Judge is a fair and decent Judge.

Other

Comment #: CA39189
Rating:10.0

Comments:
I JUST RATED HIM A 10...WE BELIEVE HIM TO BE WELL EDUCATED AND VERY FAIR. HE LISTENS TO YOUR FACTS AND THEN MAKES AN INTELLIGENT DECISION. THE POOR RATINGS BELOW ARE REDICULOUS.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA39154
Rating:1.6

Comments:
Another sad example of how corrupt our legal system is, Walmark is the worst, he waste's everyone's time, bragging about how many different types of law he's handled. He can be condescending and rude,. Even if you show him documented evidence proving you are correct, he won't read it. He
needs to be taken off the bench.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA39112
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I have been an attorney for over 15 years. He is so full of himself, at the beginning of each hearing, he feels the need to brag about how many types of law is has heard, then never follows the law. He cuts off people in the middle of their sentence, and rarely reads the documents before him. Why they allow him to be a Judge is beyond me.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA38461
Rating:1.0

Comments:
What a buffoon this so-called judge is. He couldn't make it on the westside, so they moved him to small claims. He is so unprofessional. He tells every single case about his many years on the bench, when he is retiring and how much he thinks he knows. He doesn't know much! Plaintiff didn't bring evidence after he was the one who filed...not once, but twice. This clown judge had us come back two more times for the same stupid small claims case because HOW MANY TIMES do you give an idiot plantiff the chance to bring evidence? This guy allowed him to have a simple small claims court case 3 times! He had no evidence that I did anything, and it was all lies and his "word for it." Plaintiff was lying through his teeth with his puffed up fake medical bills from his buddies. He even lied to one doctor and said he saw no other doctors, but he had seen a doctor and even turned in evidence of that. The doctor reports outed his lies. The police report did not name me or describe me, there were no pictures of me, but the plaintiff said cahe had a boo boo because of me and he cried like a baby to the judge and the judge awarded him thousands because of crocodile tears, with no burden of proof met. Had to appeal and a good judge overturned this clown's verdict because she saw the truth-no burden of proof met. This clown doesn't even look at evidence! Read the reviews. He is a pox on us all. I wish he would retire already, but how annoying he will get a pension for being a moron.

Litigant

Comment #: CA38341
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Let's tell the truth here. This judge is a massive narcissist. I was before him more than once, each time we all had to hear over and over about how he has been a judge for over 20 years. How he has done this and that and how freaking great he thinks is. Well, there is a reason he was transferred from the West Side and demoted to small claims. He is the worst. Despite evidence provided to him, he decides with the biggest crybaby in the room. He doesn't make decisions on facts or evidence, he makes them on his "feelings." Worst judge I have ever had to deal with. I wish he would retire already and save people from heartache and injustice! (Of course, he said that is retiring--me me me). He let the bad guy lying a hole win due to feelings and not evidence. Shame on him. HE SUCKS. He doesn't even care about the law and what the heck is he doing in this court!? He could never work for himself, he would be fired for incompetence.

Other

Comment #: CA36862
Rating:1.0

Comments:
My 80 mother filed a small claims lawsuit against a hideous dentist that gave her 6 crowns that were likely unnecessary and completely substandard throwing off her bite, causing her headaches and cracking her other teeth. She brought at least 4 reports from professional dentist that assessed the poor quality care and substandard crowns along with the services they performed as a result of the substandard care. The dentist brought random photos claiming they were my mothers teeth - my mom told Judge Walmark, those were not even her teeth! Walmark judged in favor of the lousy dentist! Today we receive a notice that the California Department of Justice is filing an action against that dentist on behalf of the Dental Board of California. The idiotic and unjust Walmark couldn't distinguish between the facts of 4 licensed professional dentists and the fiction of random photos from the internet presented by a substandard criminal dentist. Shame on you Walmark!

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA34553
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Terrible judge! a judge that needs to go back to law school to re-learn how to apply the law to the facts of the case before forming an opinion. The most unreasonable biased judge I have ever seen.

Litigant

Comment #: CA29889
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Terrible judge.....The sad part I campaigned for him as recommended by a good attorney friend of mine at his first run to the bench in 2002 after many years as district attorney. But when somehow I ended up in front of him... I was appalled how dirty he played, dismissed crucial hidden evidence by the other side as nothing and then blackmailed me with dirty tricks when I tried to make an issue of it because it was going to prolonged the trial while he needed to get away for his summer retreat.

Usually gay judges are more compassionate but this judge Walmark must be jaded by being a district attorney for far too long or must have had a bad pass and revenging at the world.

Dirty scum of the earth.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA23763
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Absolutely 100% perversion of justice taking place in Courtroom P. He is constantly virtue signaling to the audience, patronizing the people in the courtroom. He perverts justice to fit his agenda. A perversion of justice beyond any reality I ever had prior to being in the courtroom he has turned into a lawless place. Very disturbing.

Other

Comment #: CA23581
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Too many years being a judge at Van Nuys Ct. house which is contaminated with mold etc. Place should be shut down. Maybe the mold spores have gotten into his brain. Disgusting court house and nut job for a whatever you call IT- Judge!!

Other

Comment #: CA19401
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Anti Semitic traitor

Other

Comment #: CA19400
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Antisemitic, hateful scumbag!

Litigant

Comment #: CA16639
Rating:1.0

Comments:
No adherence to the law nor rights of one party v. the other. Entertaining, well-spoken, but a judge that needs to go back to law school to re-learn how to apply the law to facts of the case before forming opinion. Prejudiced. Justice not served. Waste of time.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA16419
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This Judge doesn't look at or consider the facts or evidence. He awarded money to a plaintiff who lied to the court several times with evidence. The plaintiff didn't deserve a dime and got 2.700 for lying to the court. Justice was not served. Sad

Other

Comment #: CA14757
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Terrible judge. Waist of time and money. He does not make the decision based on law and facts. He makes his decision before he listens to your case. All the comments in this form are very true about him. I have no idea how he can be a judge. He does not care about what you have to say and doesn't want to review the documents you brought with you. I learned a lot of personal information about him during the hearing which I should not know.

Litigant

Comment #: CA14657
Rating:1.0

Comments:
his ruling in my small claims matter actually violates federal law. Walmark needs to realize state court cannot overrule federal law just because he wants it to

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA14238
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
How many times has his clerk heard "I've been doing this for 30 years. I've done all kinds of cases, blah, blah, blah". This judge suffers from a serious complex that other judges are better than him. That's because they are and he knows it. Many judges, such as state and federal Supreme Court judges, appellate judges, federal district judges, etc, etc. look down on this small claims judge and rightfully so. He will never amount to anything more than a small claims judge. My very strong advice to anyone who wants to file a small claims case is to file downtown in the Stanley Mosk Courthouse. They have jurisdiction over the valley and its legit. Don't let this dictator ruin your day. You'll get a much fairer shake downtown instead of with this frugal democratic hill billy dictator.

Litigant

Comment #: CA14044
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Absolutely horrible. Worst experience in court I've ever had.

Other

Comment #: CA13498
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Does not pay attention to detail, and no regard for documents. Not sure how this individual became a judge, not very honorable.

Other

Comment #: CA12859
Rating:10.0

Comments:
He is very smart and follows the law no BS with this judge. He doesn't waste time with lies. California NEEDS more judges like him.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA12579
Rating:1.0

Comments:
How does this Judge stay as a Judge when it is apparently a horrible Judge That doesn't follow the law ?? I want to sued the Judge for not following the laws. This Joke of a Judge needs to be a clerk... I am going to look into placeing a lawsuit against this Judge, Housing couldn't believe that the Judge didn't know the laws.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA12566
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Walmart should not be a Judge he is horrible

Other

Comment #: CA12564
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The worst ever ! The owner and his contractor Perjured themselves.
Plus Housing couldn't believe a Judge would ruled against me. I should never had a Judgement against me. Apparently the Judge incompetent and didn't listen, when I tried to tell Walmart that the folders were changed at the last minute.
A Horrible Judge !
I planned on presenting to the Court the fraudulent checks and receipts.
I am totally disabled and a Senior
I read up on Walmart..he goes with owners
No Justice!! That Judge should be sued !

Other

Comment #: CA12505
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This is the worse judge sitting on the bench. He is unable to listen to evidence presented on both sides and make a rational decision. God help you if you are a person of color and do not have good legal representation. If you are, know that you will lose your case even if you are innocent.

Litigant

Comment #: CA12486
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This man cannot be called "judge"! Might as well get someone clueless from the streets and you get a better decision than Walmark. I presented the law, evidence and witnesses, in the end he didn't give a crap, his arrogance and cluelessness is astonishing!

Litigant

Comment #: CA11539
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This Judge should be made to comply with the law. He does not honor contracts or civil code. My case involved a tenant security deposit refund. I did everything specified by the law including notifications, walk-thrus and need for items in need of repair to get the refund. The tenant proceeded to file a law suit in small claims before the 21 days I had to give her an itemization of charges as she thought she should have had her refund in 48 hours even though she is a licensed real estate agent and should have been knowledgeable about the law. He even made me give her a full refund with an added plumbing bill and I had actually paid over $600 for this repair and she called a plumber that was unauthorized without my permission. She had unpaid rent and I was not reimbursed that. She completely destroyed the back yard which cost me 4300 dollars to replace after she acquired 2 dogs which were not pernmitted in the lease but I still had to refund her her $2100 + $250. Her crying seemed to help her case as he did not care about the rental agreement and the law. He did carry on about his life in Brooklyn and cases he had covered. We had to break for lunch because he spent so much time tooting his own horn. Bottom line he needs to follow the law and if he cannot follow the law needs to step down from the bench.

Other

Comment #: CA11538
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
HORRIBLE

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11526
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This is the worst judge. I don't know why he's still on the bench. My case was over two years ago and I'm surprised the state still allows him to be a judge. He gives a 10 minute speech on his credentials then says that he knows how he'll decide just by looking at people. He claimed there is only one kind of Prius, no difference to any. He is a buffoon. All these people complaining should file a complaint with the California judicial council

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11466
Rating:2.0

Comments:
2 times in front of him to evict tenants. 45 minute lecture before court; States that he already knows before you speak if you are guilty or not; Loves to hear the sound of his own voice, but doesn't even come close to honoring the bench or the Civil Code. He needs to be fired or disbarred.

Litigant

Comment #: CA11448
Rating:1.0

Comments:
He has SOOOOO much time to blow his own horn and waste time talking about the 55,000 cases he has tried, but he doesn't have the depth of perception to understand details of what you present to him. Honestly I am really disappointed that there wasn't a more qualified judge, this guy missed the point of my case altogether. He thinks he has his own tv show and is performing or something. Thanks for NOTHING Mr. Walmark. You just rewarded a lying narcissist like yourself. The court system is a complete circus, no one working within that system knows the first thing about reality or "justice".

Other

Comment #: CA11117
Rating:1.0

Comments:
He does not follow the law. No respect for contract or civil code and does not make decisions based on this. Makes his decision based on emotion and not fact. Spends an excessive amount of time tooting his own horn and talking about himself and other cases. Very unprofessional.

Litigant

Comment #: CA11077
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Poor and Bias Judgment.During the course of my hearing he asked me evidence I showed to him, almost at the end of the hearing he started saying I don't get reimbursement for mail, parking.... and Now I received by mail his decision and says the defendant doesn't owe me any money.

Other

Comment #: CA11072
Rating:10.0

Comments:
One of the best experiences and days of my life to have found this judge who is not a lazy, brainless robot and instead reads through most peoples' BS. He should be training the rest of them.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA10657
Rating:1.1

Comments:
Horrible Judge !!
Refused to hear my evidence !!!

Other

Comment #: CA10656
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This Judge totally ignored my evidence and refused to hear my side of the SC Case !!
I am contacting The Mayor & the News
I was totally ripped off of $7000.00 from my landlord. The landlord Ken Bucalo gave the Judge phony checks phony receipts,. The Housing ordered Ken Bucalo to repaired every thing I was charge for ! If Judge Walmart had given me the opportunity to show my evidence, perhaps he would not had been so Trick !! This Judgement has taken every last dine I had. !! This Judge should be investigated !! Again this Judge Walmart never allowed me to present my evidence!

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA10612
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Walmark is not that bad- I looked at all of the comments. There are far worse in downtown. Consider yourself lucky to have him as a jurist. Most judges are flunkies at best. This fellow has common sense. You may not have won your case but it's probably due to how it was presented. Walmark is actually a pretty decent guy.

Other

Comment #: CA10320
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I have many years experience to watch Judge Ruchard Walmark work. My job is representing clients in small claims court. During last many years Judge Walmart was always against of my clients. Why? Because he is against of everyone who is not white American. If other party was white American, then we lost for sure. Typical racist!!! We did send many petitions to supervising judge, to Sacramento. Doesnt work! Racist Judge is in Van Nuys Court! He taks very well and friendly but decision is always the same. Only in favor of white Americans. Very sad!!!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA9733
Rating:1.1

Comments:
not happy with this judge lawyers saying he is good for one reason they are afraid of him and he is afraid as well sort of feeling sympathy for the same kind

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA9546
Rating:10.0

Comments:
I have been an attorney for over 30 years in criminal defense and personal injury. I have been in Judge Walmark's courtroom several times and appreciate him more as time goes on. Unfortunately the average person would not know how to appreciate an insightful judge who follows the law and stops people from wasting the court's time. I do and feel he sets a stellar example of how to run a courtroom!

Litigant

Comment #: CA8992
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
11th worse reviewed judge in the entire state of California. Need I say more. Horrible judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8902
Rating:1.6

Comments:
Do whatever you have to do, but stay away from this Judge.

Litigant

Comment #: CA8655
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Amazing how this incompetent judge is still ruling cases with no legal grounds.
Does not this court supervisor aware of his conduct?

Other

Comment #: CA8162
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I was unlucky to be assigned to him in a hearing. Worst, worst judge of all, extremely unfair, biased and incompetent.

Litigant

Comment #: CA7987
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This man is the most unjust, incompetent man who should be removed from office. He said he bases his judgement on reading body language, doesn't need to see any papers, and can see who is guilty from just looking around the court. How dare he make such assumptions? I had everything well prepared, he didn't take any of it, and believed the plaintiff when she said there was a witness. I had proof that no witness was to be found, or ever picked up the calls to the fictitious phone number supplied. Please tell me what recourse we have to get justice and have this horrible man removed? He is an obstructor of true justice. Shame on the Judicial system for not paying heed to all the complaints and remarks about him.

Other

Comment #: CA7952
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Only allowed Plaintiff to put on her case. Stopped Defendant from putting on hers because he said attorney fees can't be collected in Small Claims court. Wouldn't take exhibits from Defendant as the case was in the wrong court (jurisdiction). He waited three days and then ruled against the defendant without knowing the defendant's side. SHOCKING, UNJUST AND A REAL KANGAROO COURT.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA7846
Rating:1.3

Comments:
Judge Wallmark is the biggest wackadoodle of them all. [Redacted by Ed.] He is incompetent, partial, and a complete moron.
If you get him as a judge, file a motion to get another ASAP!

Litigant

Comment #: CA7692
Rating:1.0

Comments:
He does not look at true facts only his. My case is based on the plaintiff lie and he was still in favor of the plaintiff.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7657
Rating:2.1

Comments:
Although I won my case YET -
Sadly I will say that I left the courtroom upset, and I still am !!! He has no respect at all, he is bias, he is drowning in his stupid ego, he does not listen, he does not preach what he says, he is so full of himself.... and I can go on and on..... he does not belong in a court room he needs to do a favor to the public and go home !!!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7344
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Horrible, Horrible, and Extremely Prejudice.
Made HUGE Proven judgment Mistakes; judgments that were overturned 180 degrees by other judges in court appeal judgments.
He gives his ego precedence over justice, while prejudging cases by assumptions rather than facts. That might be due to average intelligence, and average education - according to him, in one of his statements, during a LONG and Tedious speech before a trials

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA7329
Rating:10.0

Comments:
He is professional and insightful. I enjoyed his opening comments as he sets the tone before hearing the cases. "I am a person before I am a judge and I have a lot of common sense."

Litigant

Comment #: CA7117
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Now that I've some time to come down from the high I got from giving the defendant dirty looks in court, I saw the judge's ruling online and he is wrong. They broke the law, the owe me the money, the first judge awarded the money to me. I forgot that these Brooklyn types are hard asses who sometimes take personality into account rather than the facts. So good luck if you get him, you're gonn need it.

Litigant

Comment #: CA7110
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Told a preamble before court that I'm sure annoyed most...I loved it. Said that he was from Brooklyn and I knew right then I was gifted with a judge who would be a no-nonsense type. I hope to never be in a small claims court again but if I am, I can only hope I get him again, and I would say that even if he doesn't rule in my favor. Great judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7024
Rating:2.8

Comments:
This judge is a narcissist; he didn't even allow me to present my evidence, he'd already pre-determined that I was at fault.

Litigant

Comment #: CA6981
Rating:1.0

Comments:
The worst of the worst This judge is an unbelievable embarrassment of the justice system. He was very one sided for the defense. Refused to even look at our evidence and was very rude and very arrogant . A disgrace in a robe. Shame on the Justice system...

Court Staff

Comment #: CA6272
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Our country should thank God for Judge Walmark and others like him who balance out our ultra liberal system and have the courage to stand up to those who believe they deserve a free ride with no accountability!

Other

Comment #: CA6270
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge attempted to put my black son who was in college at CSUN in jail over a misdemeanor charge of possession of stolen property. The CSUN want to be cops (thank God they are not real cops), arrested him on the charge. My son worked for the matador patrol, and they fired him because he would not be their snitch. They harassed him until they found something to arrest him for. He had purchased a stolen computer. Consequently he ended up in walmark's court. This judge, in my opinion was the posterbord for prejudice. He wanted to take my son out of college and place him in jail. Even the prosecutors knew. It was that obvious. The MISDEMEANOR case continued for almost two years. My spouse and I were at every court hearing. The want to be cops at CSUN had escalated charges so that the bail was high. I posted the bail because I know the son that I raised. After a year, bail was once again due, (although lower because the trumped up charges had been dropped) that devil judge would not allow him to be released on his own recognizance. He was ultimately required to perform an extraordinary amount of community service, which he did in the midst of continuing his education. I filed complaints against this devil. He should not now or ever be a judge in any capacity. By the time my son had finished the terms of his sentence, walmark had been moved. The criminal justice system in America is the new form of
slavery. I thank God that he is the final judge. My son obtained his degree despite of the system's attack on him. He is independent and is doing great. I'm so proud of him. Walmark's needs to be disbarred as a judge or any other position in the criminal justice system. In order for America to survive people like him have to be exposed. I call him a devil because my spouse feel asleep in the court room on one occasion and I honesty saw his face turn into that of the devil. I don't think no one else saw it, but I did; I kid you not. I had never seen that in my life, nor have I seen it sense. The court system knows he biased that's why they moved him from the misdemeanor court to small claims. My advice to those who are a minority is to drop the case if it ends up in walmark's court.

Other

Comment #: CA6206
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The 12/4/14 positive rating and comment for Judge Walmark is about as accurate and unbiased as you can get since that person didn't even have a case with him yet. As long as you don't play games, he is one of the most amazing judges out there. It is pretty clear where the people were coming from who left him negative comments.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6205
Rating:9.1

Comments:
I read many of the reviews posted here and other sites, and so I made the time to got to court today (12/4/2014) and spend the afternoon in Judge Walmarks courtroom to gain an idea of what all of these people are complaining about. I have a trial scheduled in his court on 01/26/15.

Today I watched every single case on the afternoon calendar and I must say that I was very pleased with Judge Walmark's temperament. demeanor, professionalism, and the time that he took to hear all foe the cases.

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!

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. [Redacted by Ed.].

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.

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 - 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