Mark H. Epstein

A Champion of the Law. The Judge has authoritative knowledge on Civil Procedure, do not challenge him on black letter law. He is an exceptional agent of the rules, he does not bend the rules for his own biases (if he even had biases), rather, the Judge is persuadable by the rules and the evidence. HE READS THE MATTERIAL! Litigant, don't be under the impression that your submission goes unread, because he DOES read all of the materials. Now, reading and remembering are two different matters. One must keep in mind the amount of cases a Los Angeles Judge handles per year (1,300 cases). I observed litigant who failed to practice law by presenting the merit of the case, and leaned towards excuses and matters outside the scope of the legal proceedings which will not sway him. That does not mean he lack compassionate and empathy for situations that we as people experience, just don't abuse it or have a record of abusing the humanity of the Court. Ultimately, an exceptional Judge who should be respected by showing that you did your homework.

He possesses a profound understanding of complex legal statutes and procedural rules. Their rulings are consistently well-reasoned, clearly articulated, and firmly rooted in case law, demonstrating a meticulous approach to the bench. As the court has a heavy burden of administering 1,300 per year, the Judge manages his courtroom well. If other people would disagree, they should probably pay their tax and give their donations to the court instead of their buddies. Most attorney are arrogant and loaded on ego, they have no idea how the intricate of the internal processing of the court works. Anyways, for a judge that handles complex cases and high dollar cases, he's pulling his own weight and the weight of some of the attorneys appearing before him.

I have to say that Judge Epstein is one of the best judges in the Los Angeles County. I have had hearings before him where I lost, yet even then his rulings were well analyzed, thoughtful, and efficient. I would gladly have him hear every one of my cases. When you compare him to Judge Michael C. Small or some of the other joke judges at Stanley Mosk, you really realize how good Judge Epstein is at being a jurist. Again, I have lost numerous hearings before him, but he is even-handed, intelligent, and actually takes the time to listen to the parties and understand the issues before ruling.

Judge Epstein is easily one of the smartest judges on the LASC bench. He understands and applies the law correctly. He does not play favorites. I've tried two hotly disputed matters in his courtroom, one with a jury and one without, and he was fine in both. Also, although he does emphasize following the rules for pre-trial filings, he is willing to give the attorney(s) who failed to comply a second chance.

Judge Epstein is appalling !!! I was in shock sitting in his courtroom and listening to what was going on. One poster said he should be on the Supreme Court, ABSOLUTELY NOT !!!!! He should be removed as a Judge. I did not have matter before Epstein but a friend did.My friend had recently suffered a stroke ( T.I.A.) about which Epstein was made aware. He did not care one bit. My friend was ProPer and a lawyer himself, but not in family law. Judge Epstein yelled and screamed at him. Epstein asked him a question and he froze,like a deer in the headlights. Likely some residual from the TIA but since he sat there and could not give an answer Epstein screamed and screamed at him. Not even a consideration my friend may be having another TIA right there in front of him. So Epstein sanctioned him $10,000 ( may have been $20,000). I was in utter shock. On another occasion before Epstien,my friend at this point had an attorney represent him ( as acting in ProPer had not gone well). The lawyer sent an email to opposing counsel asking what exactly they were looking for in discovery and he would ask his client ( my friend) and see if they could find it. Being cooperative it seemed. But Epstein said they were dangling the carrot in front of opposing counsel and slammed my friend with yet another sanction! My friend's lawyer said he had never seen anything like that. He felt his email to opposing counsel regarding discovery was totally acceptable. I think Epstein just wanted an excuse to sanction him, AGAIN. The man is despicable. He should be disbarred, not reassigned. He should be removed from the bench.

` I was stunned to see a few negative comments about Judge Epstein. He is one of the premier judges on the bench; intelligent, knowledgeable, thoroughly prepared for law and motion matters, thoughtful and thorough in his analyses, and open minded. Couldn't ask for a better judge.

To the person who commented about Judge Epstein's ineptness regarding narcissism...if you have not spent enough time in His Court then you haven't yet realized that he himself if narcissistic and thus perhaps a narcissist himself. On more than one occasion, when he was challenged and clearly boxed in that he was wrong, he got angry and stormed off the Bench concluding the proceedings. [Redacted by Ed.]

Disgrace to the proffession and should be romoved from the bench

This Judge is a disgrace to the legal system. He is senile and incompetent. I am prusuing legal action to have him removed from the bench. IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT I WON BOTH MY CASES IN FRONT OF HIM SO THIS IS NOT SOUR GRAPES.

We were litigants in two cases in front of this senile incompetent idiot. We WON both our cases and I am writing this because he is an embarrassment to the legal system. He is completely bias to defense no matter the case. I think he thinks that is what “woke” is so he does everything in his power to help them. He also seems to be lonely and treats women completely different than men. With female lawyers he acts like he is on a dating game and lets them do whatever they want be it unethical behavior, not follow procedural rules, or make him look like a fool. With Men he does nothing of the sort. He also loves to hear himself talk and lets his morning sessions last 4-5 hours with business that could have been handled in 30 minutes. I honestly wonder if he is senile because his rulings show a lack of understanding of basic law . The reviews on here that are positive must be completely fake or written by equally incompetent and unprofessional dopes.

We were Plaintiffs in pro per. Judge Epstein was reassigned to our (legal malpractice) case, following the retirement of the trial court judge who heard the trial, we filed an appeal challenging that judge’s decision prior to his retirement, the judgment was reversed in our favor, but the case remained idle for two years after the filing of the remittitur due to serious mishandling by Santa Monica Courthouse. When the case was finally assigned to Judge Epstein he read the entire opinion of the court of appeal, he then analyzed and summarized it with detailed clarity. He took the time to review legal submissions and listens to the arguments. Courteous and patient with the parties. Judge Epstein possesses an impeccable knowledge of the law, he explains his rulings so lucidly that everyone can understand it laypersons and attorneys alike. He did not rule for us on all the issues we raised, he simply followed the law. He did not allow unnecessary time-consuming legal technicalities to impede fair and expeditious resolution of the case. He issued an eight-page minute order discussing in detail the reasons he granted us the second amended complaint, that minute order alone serves as a valuable educational material for those who take lively interest in legal education. In our humble opinion, this judge belongs to the Supreme Court of the United States. We are not exaggerating when we say that we were beginning to trust the judicial system, we actually started to believe that the court is not only functioning but is functioning properly in the administration of justice until a few weeks before trial, when a court official unexpectedly decided to transfer the case to another judge (for the fourth time) who knew nothing about the case, that new judge did not rule in our favor, she based her decision on non-existent facts and arguments as to all causes of action, in other words she invented another second amended complaint. We thought that she must have confused the facts of o

Wow, this guy likes to hear himself talk. I’ve never heard anyone who is more impressed with himself. Pack a lunch if you’re on his morning calendar.

Brilliant, hard-working, and reads everything you submit. He is fair and works with you to get your case resolved. Even when he rules against me I still respect his reasoning.

Fantastic disposition belongs on the Supreme Court.