"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Annabelle G. Cortez	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Los Angeles County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 2 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 3.0 - 8 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. Annabelle G. Cortez

Comments

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA50714
Rating:1.0

Comments:
She allowed an illegal adoption to carry on.
She states that she does whatever she wants to, in her court room.

Litigant

Comment #: CA50713
Rating:1.0

Comments:
In need of an official review of the records and information regarding a judgement by Hon Annabelle Cortez- she allowed FOSTER PARENTS TO SECURE PLACEMENT OF MY DAUGHTER, While an ASFA APPROVED BLOOD RELATIVE WAS WILLING TO PROVIDE PERMANENT PLACEMENT.
This judge allowed FOSTER PARENTS TO ADOPT MY DAUGHTER! I have not seen my daughter in seven years !!!
This case was corrupted from the beginning-and was never reviewed correctly. My daughter should never have been adopted by foster parents. . there were multiple violations that occurred with no penalties to address the foster placement. Please review for the legality of the placement, asfa approved of relatives who desired to adopt the grandchild- and were bonded with the child.
Foster provider took the child out of state, and returned as the foster childs’ “guardian” Additionally, these foster parents were naming the child whatever they wanted to, not the assigned name at birth-
These foster parents broke confidentiality and breached licensing agreements and laws- those witch place a child at risk and expose public information on social media, as well as photos of a child that was not legally theirs, and child was without clothing- posted pictures of the child on Facebook- info confirmed by the departments’ social worker and coworkers -documented in the case reports, failed to mention to the department that her previously adopted children are bi, racial, and a permanency placement of the foster child it’s not the most natural setting. These other children in the home that were previously adopted reportedly were hitting the foster child, and those documented via video, additionally, the child sign language, and verbally stating so happening. These foster parents were promised they would be able to adopt her on the second day that they had the foster child in their home. I would feel comforted if there was a very thorough review of all the case documents, reports and interactions made or efforts made to place the child with a family member. It appears this child was obtained incorrectly and placed illegally through the means of fraud- and case was fast tracked to Adoption. If review of the case is granted, you will also notice in the dependency court file- confidential pages with children that are that are of interest to these foster parents

While Minor was away from the foster home, on a home visit with her family- minor reported that she was hit in the face by the foster parents’ adopted son- who lived in the foster home.

Minor has appropriate visits with her family but became distressed, her desire to stay in the relatives home. Minor did not want to return to the foster home.
When visits with relatives would end- she became very frustrated and started to cry.
Please help us in case DK04781A

Litigant

Comment #: CA19732
Rating:2.0

Comments:
This judge appears to be moderate in her demeanor, but maybe she's on some kind of tranquilizer. She is definitely not impartial. Someone might review her cases and see that she holds bias in favor businesses and seems to want to deter the ordinary citizen from filing suit. While she appears to listen, she does not base her judgments on fact or on the law. She does ask interesting questions, but seems to ignore the answers.

Litigant

Comment #: CA19546
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This judge only favors large corporations and business, some have wondered if the campaign contributions she receives from these large corporations affects her judgment.

Avoid her at all costs. Terrible small claims judge for Plaintiffs.

Litigant

Comment #: CA16972
Rating:4.0

Comments:
She awards $285 on "permanent" scarring of the skin; where the plaintiff was seeking $7500.

Outrageous!

Other

Comment #: CA16375
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Cortez did not give justice. She noted the defendant party did not attend the hearing. She shut down the questioning of the plaintiff (friend) when there was a disturbance in the courtroom. She only kept the court filing and a single 2 month old demand letter and refused to keep ALL THE DOCUMENTATION FOR THE PLAINTIFF'S CASE (5/8" thick folder). She gave a decision for Plaintiff less than a 1/3 of asking, which itself was less than 1/2 of what the defendant stole. A Clear abrogation of the Judicial Canon #3. A poor judge.

Litigant

Comment #: CA16134
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Judge Annabelle G. Cortez is very smart, and level headed. In my case, she could see fast that the plaintiff was excessively lying, and he was making up stories that were not true. She fairly and properly applies the law instead of playing games. Consider yourself lucky if you are assigned to Judge Annabelle Cortez!

Litigant

Comment #: CA15185
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Cortez cannot and does not explain her decisions. She merely rules for the plaintiff or the defendant without comment. She offers no basis for her decisions. Incapable by any measure.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA14210
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Her decision was against what the law clearly states!

Other

Comment #: CA14209
Rating:2.0

Comments:
Waited over three weeks for her judgement to come in the mail. Is it possible she forget what happened in court by then?

Litigant

Comment #: CA13883
Rating:10.0

Comments:
10/10

Excellent Judge. Impartial, Intelligent & Wise.

Read the reviews carefully and you'll see many are people displeased because they lost. Judge Cortez is intelligent & fair judiciator who asks incisive questions and is able to see through people's dishonesty.

If you speak with anyone who goes into her courtroom regularly (eg. mostly business-sent attorneys & representatives), you'll find they all speak highly of her.

I am extremely grateful for her appointment and hope that she uses her prudent judgement to help many others who have been unjustly damaged or unfairly impacted by dishonest parties.

Litigant

Comment #: CA13591
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Extremely biased, sides with corporate conglomerates no matter how much evidence a plaintiff consumer presents, allows staff to be abusive (especially her bailiffs), interrupts plaintiff consumers and never lets them have their say, allows corporate defendant to interrupts plaintiff consumer.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA12668
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Recently was in her court room. She looks completely frazzled as if she wants to bolt from the courtroom! She appears mental. Would not be surprised if she is next reassigned to some loon bin!

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA12605
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Are You Kidding Me, After 50 years dealing with people I have never run across a bigger Idiot than Annabelle Cortez, Wait I forgot to mention the Honorable Judge Cortez. A complete IDIOT, MENTALLY UNSTABLE, JERRY BROWN GIVES HER TENURE OMG SHE SHOULD BE GIVEN A 5150 EVALUATION A COMPLETE DISGRACE AND SHOULD RESIGN, HEARD SHE WAS TRANSFERRED TO PASADENA GOD HELP THE LIGITANTS. SHE IS A COMPLETE INCOMPETENT IDIOT. I COULD SAY MORE BUT WHY SHE GETS HER CHECK AND GOES HOME AND DESTROYES PEOPLES LIVES NICE JOB HONORABLE ANNAABELE CORTEZ

Litigant

Comment #: CA12601
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This dummy has been reassigned to Pasadena Superior Ct. from Alhambra. She is again trying Small Claims- for her small mind!! Adding now, unlawful detainers. This is WAAAAAAAY over her little puny pea brain. 170.6 and quick.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA12423
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This Judge is an absolute Mental case. Awarded a Plantiff $10,000 on an AS-IS car sale that they paid $4000.00 for 2 Years ago. I think she should have a 5150 Mental evaluation.Luckily her Idiotic verdict was overturned on appeal by a temporary Attorney sitting in as a Judge Pro Tem. Please someone get this Idiot off the Bench. Thank you Jerry Brown for another wonderful decision appointing this NIT WIT.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12416
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
The stupidest judge ever. After providing LAW and evidence of fraud against a real estate agency for their agents fraud, this moron was so incompetent that she failed to rule accordingly questioning why the real estate agency should be held liable if the agent is a 1099 when there is actual law that holds the agency liable. Even after filing an SC-108 it landed again on this morons desk, and after chewing it down and spoon feeding it to her in a nice thick package neatly tabbed out, she again denied the request with no explanation on how she reached her idiotic decision. This clown thinks she owns the court room with NO regard for the law. An embarrassment to the judicial system.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA12397
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This Judge is an imbecile. Typical California Judge just looking out for the Victims whether they are right or wrong. Nit Wit is a compliment to this Retard.

Other

Comment #: CA12305
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
When you listen to this judge, you get the immediate idea that she is over her head and hasn't a clue as to what to do. Learned she isn't. She gets easily confused. If you are assigned to her court immed. ask to be reassigned or your fate is with a fool.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA11962
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Sat in her Small Claims court and witnessed the most appalling decision making or lack thereof. She is a super duper idiot. Pathetic. She should be reported to the Presiding Judge of this courthouse for being a misfit. Felt very sorry for the litigants. She needs to look into the mirror and accept the fact that she is in the wrong profession. I can envision her working at the 99Cent Store stocking shelves!

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA11932
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
She does small claims court- you know the ones that take 10-minutes to get screwed over. Therefore this is a court for dummy judges

Litigant

Comment #: CA11930
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
A total misfit. Not sure how she became a judge but it's probably politics as usual. Not sure how long she even practiced as an attorney but she is a dimwit and should be removed. IF you happen to get her as a judge file a 170.6 which means getting rid of her!

Other

Comment #: CA9988
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Not too bright. Just goes along with what the county counsel says.No back bone to stand up to social workers.

Other

Comment #: CA9741
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
She had absolutely no idea what she is doing! Her opinion is that of her court attorney. Shes completly enept and should never have been placed on the bench!! She not only lies but her courtroom is out of control and unprofessional. If shes your judge...BEWARE...she cares nothing about the law. Shes stated she "does what she wants in her courtroom"