"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Linda S. Marks	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Orange County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 4.5 - 8 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 4.0 - 6 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. Linda S. Marks

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA47596
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Allows lying by favorites. Like most central court judges, probably like all Judicial officers, one percent are honest neutral and detached. Logged on to zoom waited, disconnected twice, then clerk told me she called and dismissed my case.like anyone else, including most lawyers, Revelation 21 should be read and understood by them. And "Wide is the path that leads to destruction. . .
“Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.” (Matthew 7:13-14,)

Other

Comment #: CA34998
Rating:4.0

Comments:
Thought this judge might be less biased than many of the others in OC but wrong. Political like a lot of the others--and many get appointed--and will favor one side over another based on connections. In one case granted many motions to compel against one party for no responses--but gave no sanctions--while giving sanctions against another party on only one motion even though responses were provided and the issue of the motion was in dispute. Difference? One party was represented by connected firm while other was not.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA33898
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Excellent trial judge. User-friendly and accommodating to the parties. Was a mediator prior to taking the bench so use her for an MSC if you can get her.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA18445
Rating:2.3

Comments:
The only good thing to say about this judge is that she is equally bad for the defense and plaintiff sides. This judge makes decisions in law and motion without having the slightest clue regarding the legal effect of her rulings. In one case before her, she stated to the plaintiff while sustaining defendant's demuurer with prejudice that the plaintiff would have another chance at the cause of action after discovery. That equates to stupidity. NOTE: Except for the one "10" rating below (which she could have written herself [and I would not put it past her] all civil attorneys rate her at the bottom.

Litigant

Comment #: CA13503
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge was completely unfair. She openly expressed her dislike for my lawyer and my witnesses. She picked on every little thing about my side and let the other side say and do whatever she wanted to do. She made it obvious to the jury what she wanted the result to be. She was not neutral at all and treated the whole trial as an opportunity to express her personal opinions about the people involved. It was a terrible experience and left me with no confidence in the legal system.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11865
Rating:2.1

Comments:
Haughty, priggish, arrogant. Does not care about the law or the appearance of neutrality. Will pick a side based on her personal agenda and make certain she steers the jury to her conclusion. Should be limited to small claims court! Her good reviews are clearly repayment for her "favors"

Other

Comment #: CA10500
Rating:10.0

Comments:
As a juror I was impressed with the professionalism, knowledge and demeanor of this judge. It gives me great optimism knowing she is working in our judicial system. She was respectful and fair to all parties involved.

Court Staff

Comment #: CA10190
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge is excoriatingly verbally abusive to staff while the public is in the courtroom. Staff is demeaned and demoralized as are attorneys. The courtroom proceedings often become chaotic as the judge allows multiple parties speaking over each other. Quite a huge undeserved ego on this judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA9886
Rating:10.0

Comments:
This judge is a great trial judge. She knows the evidence. She works very hard to rule fairly on objections during trial. She knows her case well. She clearly reads the briefs filed. I don't understand where any of these negative comments are coming from. I will say that she does not suffer fools so if you show up late, are disrespectful to the court, opposing counsel or others, you can expect to be handled appropriately. I have never seen a male judge be described as "conceited". So I cannot help but wonder if there is a layer of sexism going on. I also note that in looking at reviews female judges consistently get lower reviews. I refuse to believe that all female judges are simply worse than the male judges. This judge was clearly a trial lawyers before she took the bench, because in my opinion she knows how to run a tight courtroom while still being deferential to counsel to put on their cases. She treats counsel and the jury will respect. She tries very hard to ensure a fair trial sometimes given extra leeway to an opposing counsel who is clearly less experienced. She has even taken a sidebar to explain to counsel why objections keep getting explained clearly in an attempt to give counsel a chance to fix the situation. I am super impressed and would try a case in her courtroom any day. I don't know if the lawyers giving bad reviews have done a trial in front of her. But if you are a trial lawyer, and you want a judge that does not play fast and loose with the rules of evidence, and keeps a tight courtroom, there is none better out there.

Other

Comment #: CA9862
Rating:10.0

Comments:
This judge was eloquent and on top of everything. Very respectful to all parties and represented the court in the best way possible.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8435
Rating:1.7

Comments:
This judge must be in competition for worst superior court judge. The anger and condescension aimed at the attorneys is second to none. What makes matters worse is she will not take the time to learn. Further, her knowledge of the law is poor and she seems not to have a clue what the ramifications of some of her rulings. Lastly, she shows no inclination of improving in any way. Definitely stay away if you can.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5147
Rating:3.0

Comments:
Nasty temperament and slow on the uptake. Conceited, wants counsel to be extremely deferential to her at all times. A complete boor. Has ugly nasty clerk and courtroom assistant as well.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4972
Rating:4.6

Comments:
I have had many cases with Judge Marks. She can be brutal to attorneys if you do anything, however slight, to get on her bad side.

She has a clerk who does all of the reading and research on law and motion matters. He sits pro tem for her when she is out. He has a high opinion of himself.

I do not agree with all of the rulings that I get from this judge, but the majority of the time her rulings at least make some sense (which is more than can be said for many of her colleagues). Sometimes she gets it right. I don't think that I've ever gotten something out of left field from her. I've definitely had some issues go against me that I think I should have won.

Overall, she is middle-of-the-road. She has a poor judicial temperament, but is adequately intelligent, with no overt bias. You can do better, but you can also do much worse. I would not paper her, because you will probably end up with someone worse.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA1840
Rating:2.0

Comments:
I generally like Orange County Central Justice Center but this judge is an exception. She and her clerk are ignorant nasty time wasters. You can find yourself going around and around and around with them; nothing gets done but you get a lot of attitude.