"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Ruth Ann Kwan	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Los Angeles County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 2.5 - 35 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 2.0 - 10 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. Ruth Ann Kwan

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA42806
Rating:9.8

Comments:
Every negative comment is absolutely wrong. She is one of the smartest and hardest working judges I have ever come across in my entire career. She understands the issues very quickly and knows the law. She is very fair. Additionally, her staff is great.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA39234
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I have the lowest opinion of any judge I have ever encountered based on trial transcripts and my 28 page well-documented complaint I filed against Ruth Ann Kwan regarding a civil case.

Court Staff

Comment #: CA38485
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Dear Private,

The CJP can’t be trusted to uphold the law, making citizen direct action necessary.

Keep up the fight. Post all you know. Information is power and information wants to be free. You will be vindicated, and the crimes of this judge exposed in time.

Very Truly,

Ventura County’s Radiant Truth

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA38484
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Based on court transcripts and my beliefs, I filed a well documented complaint on April 20, 2020, against Judge Ruth Ann Kwan with the Commission on Judicial Performance consisting 28 pages that documented Kwan's conduct and her recorded statements. Based on information and belief, I believed Kwan's conduct was egregious and hostile misconduct with extreme prejudice against me, the Plaintiff, regarding a CA Superior court case. I also believe Kwan's instructions to the jury omitted full "relevant" terms and conditions of a settlement agreement that was the subject to the court case. Kwan, I believe, by limiting/ prohibiting my reference to full settlement terms and conditions, to allow me to present the settlement agreement within the accepted terms that the agreement be interpreted within the "four corners" of the settlement agreement that was the subject of my court case was detrimental to my case. The Commission on Judicial Performance, much later on July 15, 2021, dismissed my 28 page complaint without addressing "any of my specific, well documented transcribed words of Kwan". This causes me to believe the commission did not review my complaint with due diligence which causes me to believe their determination is irrefutably worthless. The commission dismissed my complaint against Kwan by simply claiming in "one sentence" that the commission found no basis for action against the judge "OR" determined not to proceed further. Appears to me the commission did not want to proceed. I also find the other one star reviews pertaining to Kwan very disturbing. Comment #CA37777 below should be reviewed often.

Other

Comment #: CA38450
Rating:1.0

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA38447
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
selected wrong occupation comment #: CA38446

should be other; not a defense lawyer

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA37777
Rating:1.4

Comments:
Worst judge I have encountered in over 30 years of trying cases. She should not be on the bench. Bad tempered. Decides who should win and then molds her rulings accordingly. You cannot rely on what she says during counsel discussions or pre-trial rulings. She either doesn’t remember what she said/ruled or intentionally sandbags you. Make a record each time and get a transcript. Anything she said that is not on the record will not be honored if she does not want it to be, and even if the record exists, she will change her mind even after you relied on what she said/ruled. 170.6 for the sake of your client and your own sanity.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA36886
Rating:9.0

Comments:
Seems like most of the commenters on this Judge do not like her personality, and are confused about what a Judge's job is. It's not to make you feel good. It's to apply the facts of the case and rule on the law.

Have I seen Judge Kwan rule weirdly on an issue? Once, when she was trying to force the parties to settle a case before she called a jury. It was odd thing that she did but it worked. She could tell that the parties just needed a push to resolve the case, and she gave that push. Case settled with jurors in the box.

I have never tried a case in Judge Kwan's court. But in my opinion, Judge Kwan's rulings are solid on the law and the facts. Is she the most perfect jurist who ever was a jurist? No. But she's a very good judge, and the people who are advising to 170.6 her when assigned are giving bad advice.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA35434
Rating:9.6

Comments:
I am somewhat surprised reading so many negative comments about Judge Kwan. I have chaired three trials in her courtroom (lost and won), multiple times before her in law and motion matters, and I've been in settlements where Judge Kwan has acted as the MSC Judge. In my opinion, she is the hardest working judge in Stanley Mosk. She is careful, smart, committed, quickly understands the most important issues of a case, and most importantly, she is FAIR! There is some truth to the observations that she can be temperamental, she does not suffer fools, and she will cut to the chase, but if you're prepared and polite, you will find her open to your arguments.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA35226
Rating:3.4

Comments:
Have litigated in LASC for 20 years. Have been victorious in front of Kwan more than once. Have had her conduct MSC on cases, and have had her as trial judge. Won and lost.

She has a bad temperment. She may have Aspergers. If she woke up on wrong side of the bed, you will know it because she will attack either side and be loud. Basically her motto is, "I'm not happy until you're not happy."

I would avoid her like COVID-19.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA34913
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Just an awful judge, doesn't deserve to wear the robe. 170.6 every time. Extremely unprofessional.

Litigant

Comment #: CA33634
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Kwan is an egotistical jurist who is prejudiced against Asians. Yellow on Yellow prejudice.
Retired Jurists have remarked that Kwan is "never wrong".
Extremely heavy handed for the sole purpose of keeping her calendar moving and not having a backlog on her scorecard.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA31821
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I had a single appearance before her.

She invented an issue that did not exist and was not raised in the papers. And she was wrong about the issue, even if it had existed. And she was rude.

One of the worst in Stanley Mosk.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA31633
Rating:1.3

Comments:
This judge is abysmal and should be your 170.6 every time. She doesn't read papers but is extremely opinionated and (contradictorily) completely changes her mind from hearing to hearing. She is entirely unpredictable in her positions and unprofessional in her demeanor. I would feel more comfortable with my case being heard before my 6 year old niece or 8 year old nephew.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA29137
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Not just an awful judge, but also a awful human being. She yells for no reason, cuts people off, thinks she is smarter than everyone else.

Her rulings make no sense. I have been on both ends of her rulings, winning hearings/losing hearing, and my opinion doesn't change.

Doesn't have an understanding of the law, lacks ethics.

She and Marc Gross are the worst judges in the LASC. Someone should run against her. She won't retire, because she knows no one would retain her for mediation/arbitration.

Litigant

Comment #: CA25806
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I, an African American male went before Judge Kwan as an In Pro Se for 1.5 years. She routinely held matters in chamber, and waited until the Courtroom was empty prior to calling my case forward so that no one could witness her violate the Judicial Cannons and break the law. On several occassions Judge Kwan refused to address my evidence attached to motions and would not accept any evidence during the hearings. She routinely rushed my hearings and would snap a nasty attitude and leave the bench in the middle of me questioning her rulings and fraud. I BEGGED her to sit and listen to the facts of my case and applicable law, but she would always manipulate the situation my becoming passively aggressive and rush back into her chambers because she didn't want the Court Reporter to document everything I was saying because i would point out the Judicial Cannons and law she routinely broke. It's like she knew she was wrong the entire time and "urged" me to file an appeal, thinking I would settle on appeal... But she is wrong!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA24420
Rating:1.8

Comments:
Judge Kwan's rulings often did not follow the law or the correct legal procedure. She also tends to continue hearings rather than ruling making you come back three and four times. She frequently makes simple things difficult. She also appeared to be very rigid and difficult with female attorneys compared to their male counterparts. Will 170.6 next time.

Other

Comment #: CA24001
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I observed this judge because my husband was involved in a lawsuit heard in her court. This judge destroyed my confidence in the justice system. She ignored ethics rules, she allowed the court to be lied to, and it appeared to me that she couldn't care less if justice was served in her courtroom.
After dealing with her for around a year, I got the feeling that she might even be biased against LGBT litigants in her courtroom.
She repeatedly refused to make rulings and seemed to be there in body only.
She repeatedly held hearings in her chambers and even stated once that she had already made a decision without reading any of the motions involved.
She also stated that she was going to allow the case to go to a jury regardless of the procedural rules and motions filed by the attorneys.
Is she just too afraid to made decision herself? She seemed to be someone who didn't want to do her homework, and that was obvious during the hearings I witnessed and heard about.
I am not an attorney but I certainly got an education in how the courts can be biased and can pervert the law in these United States.
What a shame that someone like this is being paid by taxpayers in this country when it seems she doesn't care about justice being served at all.
I also saw the opposing counsel not answer her questions correctly and she made no follow up to examine their lies.
Avoid her at all costs.

Litigant

Comment #: CA22600
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Kwan is by far one of the most rediculous, vindictive human beings i've ever come across. She made rulings in the "clear absence of jurisduction", even more those rulings were not based on facts or law; just her tentatives she clearly doesn't write herself but will defend endlessly. I had to sue her in Federal Court, then afterwards she still refused to abid by the Equal Protection Clause, refused to 170.1(6)(A)(i)-(iii) herself and then continued to rule with emotions, pride and ego which only creates ajudicative facts to use against her in Federal Case No. 19-cv-04088. She's so horrible even attorneys who prevail on motions have aided and abetted me to get rid of her for being racist, wasting tax dollars and treating me as a pro se litigant like dirty. This women does not understand law, does not apply the California Evidence Codes correctly, does not have electronic recording in Department 72, walked off bench in the middle of hearings and will not hesitate to participate in coercion, will try padding your court records and does not follow the Judical Cannons. I made sure i filled ever lawsuit I needed in case she tried delaying me. I have her in Federal Court, and looking forward to addressing her behavior in the Supreme Court. She's literately trying to systematically harrass and bully me, but she found her match!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA19599
Rating:2.4

Comments:
Judge Kwan routinely raises arguments that neither side raised (and which are, invariably, wrong on the law), and she often announces how she's going to rule on a motion without having read the motion.

This judge either lacks substantive knowledge of the law, or the intelligence necessary to sit as a judge. Either way, she shouldn't be hearing any cases other than those found in small claims or traffic court.

Now that Judge Hiroshigi is out of the picture, Judge Kwan is the 170.6 choice for Los Angeles. Avoid her at all costs.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA15262
Rating:8.8

Comments:
Bad comments are probably from the losing side that didn't understand that this judge is very bright. She analyzes immediately and tries to dispense substantial justice and not just kick the can down the road. Granted she appears impatient with attorneys making silly arguments, but I would rather have that than an erroneous ruling!
I was particularly impressed with how patient she was with a pro per; and, how fair she tried to be on my recent ex parte.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA13538
Rating:9.1

Comments:
Hard working; on top of things; knowledge of the law. F A I R. This judge is not only excellent but excellence itself.
She ruled against me but you have to see through this. That is why my highest rating carries the extra weight regardless of her ruling. Watching her masterful handling of every situation is a unique experience. Amazing rapport with the jury who each loved her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12395
Rating:1.0

Comments:
If I ever have the misfortune of seeing this awful name on a pleading again I will run screaming to file a 170.6. She is an absolute nightmare! Uncaring, unthinking, irrational, biased, and RUDE. Obviously hears all motions in chambers because she doesn’t want witnesses or a record to her insanity.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11195
Rating:1.0

Comments:
170.6 this judge and don't look back.
Worse than Sohigian by far!
Very unprofessional.
Horrible judicial temperament.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8601
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I have been practicing for some twenty years and my time in her court is by far my worst experience. You go into her chambers and she reads the file for the first time and never looks up, while you stand there. She has no social graces. Clueless.

I had a simple matter that she turned into a time consuming fiasco. I had to spend some twenty hours trying to undue her ruling. Her rulings have no rhyme or reason. The more complex rulings seem straight from a research attorney, because she could not explain her tentative. She argued against her own tentative.

Be prepared to sit around and wait in her court. Be prepared for her uncalled for unpleasantness. The whole experience is bizarre.

Make not mistake about it, she is no tough minded stickler to the rules. I know where I stand with these type of judges. There is no sense in anything that goes on in her court. Welcome to the Twilight Zone.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7485
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Kwan is completely unsuited to be a judge. She has a a bad temperment. She has no sense of when to be flexible and went to be firm. She allowed opposing counsel to waste hours of my time and thousands of dollars of my client's money due to failure to answer discovery, violations of her oders and missed court appearences yet she never ordered a single dollar of sanctions. If you are a sloppy incompetent lawyer, you will love her. If not, paper her without hesitation.

Litigant

Comment #: CA7009
Rating:10.0

Comments:
All ratings I read are FAR FROM THE TRUTH! I like her style to go in chambers. We had lots of related cases for her to read a lot in an ex-parte motion. She goes to the point. I will give her 10 stars!
I hope she keeps it that way. IN CHAMBERS!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6994
Rating:1.0

Comments:
probably the worst judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6595
Rating:1.2

Comments:
Needs to be off the bench. When is her election coming up? Someone should run against her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6295
Rating:2.8

Comments:
Between co-counsel and I, we have tried over 300 civil jury trials, and this is the WORST judge either of us have ever seen. PAPER HER WITHOUT HESITATION IN ALL CASES. We won, and won big in a jury trial in her department, and despite that victory, we would NEVER willingly enter her department again.

Other

Comment #: CA5941
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I knew there was something seriously wrong with this women when I heard she actually was siding with Abby Lee Miller in the case involving Paige Hyland. A thirteen year old girl who was abused for all the world to see on Lifetime TV.Yet this Moran who obviously can't see, has no problem with a 5 hundred pound women threatending and screaming at a little girl. Where ever it is this women (NOT HONORABLE IN ANY WAY)came from she needs to go back! To what ever country she came from. We punish people in America who abuse our children!! Go back home!! We don't want your type here!!! What more could I say my rating should say it all!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5542
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Useless pustule. Shortly after the case was filed she made an arbitrary and erroneous ruling. Rather than correcting herself (something that both sides gave her ample opportunity to do) she spent the rest of the case making tortured, incomprehensible, contradictory rulings to support her initial position. Both sides spent tens of thousands of dollars with various motions urging her to correct her position to no avail.

She is an embarasment to the bench and a genuinely distasteful human being. Expect to be belittled, yelled at and frustrated. Expect her to be unprepared and to waste your time and your client's resources. Expect to use her incompetence as fodder at cocktail parties for the rest of your career.

Litigant

Comment #: CA5541
Rating:1.0

Comments:
After having encountered another poor judge who denied my TRO without reading my paperwork and then misapplyed the law to favor a city attorney, I presented a new motion to Judge Kwan on July 16, 2014 wherein I set forth conclusive proof that the city attorney had filed false documents to win the prior TRO hearing. I showed that the signature on the declaration filed by the city attorney had been forged and I requested that Judge Kwan rule in my favor or require the city attorney to produce the alleged affiant for oral examination and for a handwriting sample. The city attorney was nervous, but not to worry, she denied my motion without argument. The city attorney said nothing. The hearing lasted all of 45 seconds after having me wait for 2 1/2 hours to be called. I do not believe she read any of the pleading I submitted. She decided the matter in favor of the city by saying that the city had no obligation to bring in the affiant even though the city submitted a declaration that was later determined to be forgery. When I told her that this was an emergency (I had no water service) she told me to file a motion for reconsideration, which I cannot do since the prior motion was heard in May, 2014, well past the 10 day limit for reconsideration. She either knew that or she was blowing smoke, or both. She is anti-pro per, and very slick. She was looking for a way to rule against me, and she did. Had the roles been reversed and I had submitted a forged declaration, she would have acted to correct the matter. She needs to be disciplined or removed, but I don't see it coming.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5492
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Horrible judicial temperament.
Horrible temper.
Refusal to apply law.
Unfair; unwilling to listen to arguments of both sides.
Rude to counsel and parties.
Inconsiderate of parties and counsel.
Does not know the law, and unwilling to learn.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5383
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
There is something terribly wrong with this judge. She is absolutely nuts. She is worse than Sohigian, worse than Elizabeth Feffer. Possibly the worst judge in LASC Central.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5212
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Possibly THE worst judge in LASC Central if not the entire County now that Sohigian finally retired. She is rude, mean spirited and a bully. Knows absolutely NOTHING about civil procedure. Her background is criminal law but was booted from the criminal courts for ordering a defendant shackled over nothing. I will NOT 170.6 anyone in Central for fear of getting her. THE absolute worst. NO redeeming qualities whatsoever. Cannot believe she is allowed to remain on the bench

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3779
Rating:1.1

Comments:
By far the worse judge that I have encountered in 25 years of litigation. She is completely biased towards defendants and will issue rulings that are completely unsupported by the evidence. During our trial, it was clear that she had engaged in ex parte discussions with defense counsel in determining how to undermine our case. Judge Kwan should be removed from the bench.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2582
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Kwan epitomizes all that is wrong with the legal system and causes average citizens to lose faith in it. She is totally incompetent and rude. Repeatedly wasted our time and that of our lawyer. She was incredibly rude and condescending to plaintiffs, gave undue weight to paper thin and inconclusive evidence submitted by the defendant to apportion settlement proceeds and made totally gratuitous and insulting statements in a pro-forma minor settlement approval case where a defendant's product injured a small child in front of her parents. If there is a way to remove her from the bench let me know. I will be first in line.

Other

Comment #: CA2507
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Terrible judge. She was notified that the defendants were not licensed by the Cal. Department of Real Estate, but she ruled in their favor and dismissed the complaint with prejudice in a property mortgage foreclosure lawsuit. Now there will be a motion for mistrial to prohibit her ruling from taking effect.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2466
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Easily one of the worst judges in the Los Angeles Superior Court System. Uses her own set of rules. Little knowledge of the actual rules of practice. A bully, rude and demeaning. Oddly, she never takes the bench unless for trial. Hides in chambers and avoids allowing any of her madness to be on the record.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2417
Rating:2.4

Comments:
One word: awful. She doesn't understand the law or approach cases with an open mind. She tries to impose her will on the lady of justice.

Other

Comment #: CA2359
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Horrible judge. Very unfair. She had no courtesy or fairness. Very un professional. She made us lose a very big case. After msc with her the losing party out of no where did some new tricks and won the case. We assume she helped them with the case. Was talking to other party for one hour alone. Didn't even see me once. Without listening to our side of story . Or even see me. It eas very unfair. A nightmare. I never forget this horrible lady. After msc with her. The plaintiff didn't wnt to settle , not vn give any offers to settle. Plaintiff took different way of approach. Won the case . We don't know what she told them for one hour lone. But that was the turning point of the case.
She didn't, evn see me to hear my side of story. I felt very upset and disappointed. Lost a winning case. To a crook fraudulent Chinese supplier. Who didn't even had a real company in USA. It's really sad that obviously we have no hard evidence that she helped and adviced the other side. Horrible. Horrible. Horrible. Unfair unfair unfair.
This is least I can do. Lost $400k. Beware. Of this judge. 170.6 is not enough. She should be penalized if she gives advise to other parties.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1961
Rating:1.0

Comments:
TERRIBLE! She tried to force settlement throughout. Failed to follow Court of Appeal orders, and failed to understand/follow statutory and common law. She is disorganized and tries to do as much as she can off the record and in her chambers. DO NOT HESITATE TO 170.6!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1879
Rating:1.5

Comments:
I join in the other negative reviews. This is the worst judge I have ever experienced in my entire trial carrier spanning over 25 years, in over 100 trials and binding arbitrations, throughtout the United States. Definite 170.6.

Litigant

Comment #: CA1712
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Great and very smart judge! Spend her time reading the motions! She will not tolerate mikky mouse cases, as she value her time. Those of you who wants to use the justice for the personal benefit should stay away from this courtroom.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA1605
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I loathe this judge. She is horrific in every aspect of her being. She is unpleasant, unprepared and unforgiving. What a worthless combination of molecules.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1498
Rating:1.2

Comments:
Just awful. Won't listen during oral argument, interrupts counsel, and lets her clueless clerks run the courtroom while she cools her heels for an hour while costing your client money. What a joke.

Other

Comment #: CA1149
Rating:3.0

Comments:
She even tries to push and bully her own family. Difficult and nosy. Likes to intimidate people. I have personally known her to make mean and snide comments.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1105
Rating:1.5

Comments:
It does not matter how good an attorney you are or how well you represent your client. She's just putting in the least amount of work she thinks she can get away with so she can collect her salary. Horrible.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA356
Rating:2.1

Comments:
Beware of this judge. She handles most matters in chambers where she tries to bully counsel into submission off the record. Doesn't thoroughly read motions if she does read them at all. She substitutes her own rules for the Rules of Civil Procedure, especially with regard to discovery motions. She has a criminal law background and very little understanding of civil litigation. She is also extremely combative in chambers. I would not hesitate to 170.6 this judge in the future. She is very unprofessional.