Elaine Lu

Superior Court

CaliforniaLos AngelesCalifornia
2.0/ 5

12 reviews

Courtroom conduct2.0
Impartiality2.0
Case preparation2.0
Case management2.0
Quality of rulings2.0
Treatment of counsel2.0
Empathy with parties2.0
Language & clarity2.0

Get notified when a new review is published

Have you had an experience with this judge? Review and get your reward

Reviews (12)

I regret not 170.6-ing her when I had the chance.

2.0
/ 5

I regret not 170.6-ing her when I had the chance. Please, someone give her three highly experienced law clerks, a court staff that isn't grossly incompetent and wildly unprofessional, and a clean courtroom. Discovery? Don't bother with motions, she won't enforce it any more than she will her own orders. Trial dates are firm? Expect six trial continuances minimum. Because she does not enforce her own orders, her cases pile up, and she can't manage the workload. NEVER walk in there without a court reporter, preferably in-person, because she counts on having no record. Always double check the minute orders - the names and dates will be wrong. She can also be truly abusive and demeaning. She substitutes her own opinion for the law, makes assumptions that should be left for a jury, and puts her thumb on the scale whenever she feels like it - it can work for you or against you.

AnónimoLawyer

I regret not 170.6-ing her when I had the chance.

2.0
/ 5

I regret not 170.6-ing her when I had the chance. Please, someone give her three highly experienced law clerks, a court staff that isn't grossly incompetent and wildly unprofessional, and a clean courtroom. Discovery? Don't bother with motions, she won't enforce it any more than she will her own orders. Trial dates are firm? Expect six trial continuances minimum. Because she does not enforce her own orders, her cases pile up, and she can't manage the workload. NEVER walk in there without a court reporter, preferably in-person, because she counts on having no record. Always double check the minute orders - the names and dates will be wrong. She can also be truly abusive and demeaning. She substitutes her own opinion for the law, makes assumptions that should be left for a jury, and puts her thumb on the scale whenever she feels like it - it can work for you or against you.

AnónimoLawyer

I am a fan - she is a very good judge who really does care about getting things right.

5.0
/ 5

I am a fan - she is a very good judge who really does care about getting things right. Surprised her ruling is low on this website.

AnónimoLawyer

I am a fan - she is a very good judge who really does care about getting things right.

5.0
/ 5

I am a fan - she is a very good judge who really does care about getting things right. Surprised her ruling is low on this website.

AnónimoLawyer

Racist jurist who threw out a jury verdict for conversion (i.e., theft) and for punitive damages (12-0) for an Asian ...

1.0
/ 5

Racist jurist who threw out a jury verdict for conversion (i.e., theft) and for punitive damages (12-0) for an Asian female attorney who she appeared totally enamored with. Refused to dismiss a prospective juror who was Asian and could not speak or understand English proclaiming the prospective juror understands about 75%. Gave more weight to the Asian attorney's law clerk, who was a documented tax cheat and refused admission to the California Bar, than to a 41-year trial attorney who was a past president of a local bar association. Always placed case at end of calendar (even when told attorney had oral argument before the Ct of Appeal) to conceal her rulings from the other attorneys who appeared before her. Constantly complained from the bench about how frequently she was reversed by the Court of Appeal.

AnónimoLawyer

Racist jurist who threw out a jury verdict for conversion (i.e., theft) and for punitive damages (12-0) for an Asian ...

1.0
/ 5

Racist jurist who threw out a jury verdict for conversion (i.e., theft) and for punitive damages (12-0) for an Asian female attorney who she appeared totally enamored with. Refused to dismiss a prospective juror who was Asian and could not speak or understand English proclaiming the prospective juror understands about 75%. Gave more weight to the Asian attorney's law clerk, who was a documented tax cheat and refused admission to the California Bar, than to a 41-year trial attorney who was a past president of a local bar association. Always placed case at end of calendar (even when told attorney had oral argument before the Ct of Appeal) to conceal her rulings from the other attorneys who appeared before her. Constantly complained from the bench about how frequently she was reversed by the Court of Appeal.

AnónimoLawyer

I agree she is the worst judge in Los Angeles Superior Court but we should report our complaints to "The Commission o...

1.0
/ 5

I agree she is the worst judge in Los Angeles Superior Court but we should report our complaints to "The Commission on Judicial Performance" to put an end to her bias and abuse. this independent state agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity and for disciplining judges, pursuant to article VI, section 18 of the California Constitution. Please stop complaining and do something about it

AnónimoLawyer

I agree she is the worst judge in Los Angeles Superior Court but we should report our complaints to "The Commission o...

1.0
/ 5

I agree she is the worst judge in Los Angeles Superior Court but we should report our complaints to "The Commission on Judicial Performance" to put an end to her bias and abuse. this independent state agency responsible for investigating complaints of judicial misconduct and judicial incapacity and for disciplining judges, pursuant to article VI, section 18 of the California Constitution. Please stop complaining and do something about it

AnónimoLawyer

170.6! Intellectually dishonest, demonstrably biased, sneaky, and untrustworthy.

1.0
/ 5

170.6! Intellectually dishonest, demonstrably biased, sneaky, and untrustworthy. Disregarded the jury's verdict, which included punitive damages (12-0). Prior to that, she played every game in the book to undermine the case. Avoid disappointment - Avoid.

AnónimoLawyer

170.6! Intellectually dishonest, demonstrably biased, sneaky, and untrustworthy.

1.0
/ 5

170.6! Intellectually dishonest, demonstrably biased, sneaky, and untrustworthy. Disregarded the jury's verdict, which included punitive damages (12-0). Prior to that, she played every game in the book to undermine the case. Avoid disappointment - Avoid.

AnónimoLawyer

Makes everything more difficult that it needs to be.

2.0
/ 5

Makes everything more difficult that it needs to be. Absolutely on the 107.6 list.

AnónimoLawyer

Makes everything more difficult that it needs to be.

2.0
/ 5

Makes everything more difficult that it needs to be. Absolutely on the 107.6 list.

AnónimoLawyer