"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Ronald F. Frank	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Los Angeles County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 4.9 - 6 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 4 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. Ronald F. Frank

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA53975
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I had the worst experience in small claims court. Judge believed on bleached carpet ( false evidence) that too after move out inspection.( false fact).I gave him my written evidence I am paying half . He said let’s look at your calculations but he didn’t he only got one fact and said I will give this to Defendant. My evidence which was ignored and excluded from trial and ruling. Landlord is paying for carpet invoice is for 53 yards. Landlord is paying for Large bedroom bedroom 33 yards and I am paying for small bedroom 20 yards. so my balance is $18*20*0.75 (proration as mentioned in lease) = $270 how it was calculated 954/2 = $477. Dependent testimony how many rooms do you have 5 how many rooms with carpet do you have bedrooms living room and hallway what are you paying for living room and hallway. Judge said you will be paying more and ruled against me and scolded me for leaving behind bleach carpet that too after move out inspection. Bad faith claim dismissed with false evidence and false move out inspection.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA42451
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I had the worse experience in small claims court . Property management company was charging me non refundable security deposit and refused to pay me back so I filed case against them. Defendant showed false damage and lied about the move out inspection and Judge believed in all the lies. He never looked at my evidence which contradicted. I was blamed for false damages and false move out inspection. Why would someone go to court if they left damages and if told to remedy identify it.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA40867
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He doesn’t read evidence .

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA40733
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
He doesn’t read the evidence.

Other

Comment #: CA40032
Rating:2.0

Comments:
Terrible! Doesn't take the time to review or READ THE EVIDENCE! Or understand the immediate time requirements of an owner to abate hazardous materials from an occupied unit. Granted possession of a property to the owner after tenant was displaced for months due to contamination to property and contents and requested the required cleaning. Frank didn't bother to read the reports from both parties in which both found contamination on contents inside property and rules parties didn't bother to test contents. Absolutely mind blowing!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA33264
Rating:2.3

Comments:
This is by far the worst judge I have ever encountered and I have been around several judges. He is HORRIBLE.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA28783
Rating:2.1

Comments:
Judge Frank handles unlawful Detainer cases in Inglewood where I appear regularly on behalf of Landlords. He is generally pro-tenant but it goes so far beyond that. Judge Frank is very easily persuaded by almost any argument made by tenants in his courtroom, not matter how clearly bogus it may be. A default judgment or even a stipulated settlement means nothing to him. He loves to make attorneys show up with process servers for live testimony about whether or not an action has been properly served. He routinely is in a foul mood and yells at attorneys and litigants for things like not going to the right side of the table. He automatically gives every tenant an extra 5 days to move out. He also, depending on his whim that day, will during the middle of a hearing or trial decide he wants you to come back for some motion he decides to set on his own. I advise all of Unlawful Detainer clients to file a 170.6 against him.

Other

Comment #: CA27740
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
God awful. Rude and discourteous.

Other

Comment #: CA26977
Rating:1.0

Comments:
I just left the small claims courtroom of Judge Ronald F. Frank in Department 8 of the Inglewood Superior Courthouse. This post is not about the details of the case. I am still in amazement that he had the temerity to only award one-half of a contracted amount, even when the defendant perjured and contradicted himself at least 3 times in less than 5 minutes. If you should ever see Ronald F. Frank running for Office 61 of the Los Angeles County Superior Court, vote for anyone else who has a pulse.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA18954
Rating:9.4

Comments:
I appeared for an unlawful detainer matter and watched Judge Frank handled various matters before mine. A lot of the parties before him are not represented. He takes the time and effort to explain procedure and his ruling to all. He ensures that the trial was conduct fairly. He was incredibly patient and polite to everyone in his courtroom.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA16932
Rating:9.9

Comments:
One of the fairest judges on the bench. This judge rolled up his sleeves and spend literally tens of hours researching the law and determining what is fair in unchartered territories of healthcare law in order to determine an equitable ruling between litigants and the multibillion dollar healthcare insurance carriers. He has ruled on numerous cases , both for and against the small guy, but his rulings are fair, well thought out and he explains in detail the how and why. If either side disagrees with him, he will listen - to a fault- attentively and determine if there was an issue with his ruling. He is not a haughty judge at all. He is very humble. I truly cannot understand why anyone would give him less than 10 stars. The system is wasting this resource by having him rule on small claims cases. He really should be dealing with much more complex cases in civil court. HE IS THAT GOOD!!!! If they do move him to a higher bench I will truly miss his clarity of his thought process and his will of true equitable rulings .
If you are lucky enough to get this guy and have a righteous claim , make sure you do not even think of a peremptory challenge. He will give you a fair ruling and spend the time figuring out the issues

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA14966
Rating:1.0

Comments:
One of the worst judges ever. very insecure and not very bright. Should not be on the bench.

Litigant

Comment #: CA14951
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Bad judge. Nasty temperament and unfair. Should be kicked off being a judge. Unfair and prejudiced. Taks about his personal life and his vacations. A complete jerk!

Litigant

Comment #: CA14950
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This judge seems to be biased against women. He is erratic, mean and nasty, He says one thing and then immediately, changes mind and is nasty to litigants.I consider him one of the worst judges and feel she should be voted off the bench as he is a disgrace. Very condescending and unprofessional. Suffers from small man syndrome. Has to be nasty and sarcastic to feel better about himself.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12875
Rating:4.7

Comments:
Allows his clerks to enter default judgments without NOTICE and will even brag about taking vacation during the time clerk entered default. Doesn't care if no hearing on merits. Doesn't care if plaintiff's do not serve properly and lack of adherence to CCP