Elizabeth A. Grimes, LASC Dept. R (Santa Monica)

[Underdog]

Elizabeth A. Grimes, LASC Dept. R, Santa Monica (Was Dept. 30 Downtown) General Civil

[Law Monster]

She will support any governmental agency on any issue over you. My client lost on summary judgment, not only did the court of appeal overturn her, but wholly adopted my client's position and published it. It was a very basic civil procedueral issue, e.g. involving dismissal of a case without prejudice and re-filing (there were no other issues e.g. statute of limitations). I think either her mental comprehension abilities are blocked whenever the government walks in, she is biased against parties with foreign (e.g. middle eastern sounding names--albeit my client actually is a white red head) or she is just lazy. I would not feel comfortable with her.

[BizLawyer]

I have had a two cases almost to trial before Judge Grimes over the past 7 or 8 years.

Her good aspects were to keep trial dates, deny summary judgment motions (e.g. when they are over a a couple of inches thick.) She would comment if it took that much paper to say there are no triable issues then there must be a triable issue of fact somewhere. She denies demurrers even if they were technically correct. But I can understand that. I never liked how she handled discovery motions, she allways grants motions to compel even when not properly before the Court or even if the questions are not clear. She also awards sanctions without thinking how that may adversly effect the case. But oh well. But now, in Santa Monica, I saw her and from now on, I would 170.6 her in a heartbeat.

Luckily, my case settled, but I saw Grimes twice in Court just let loose on two different lawyers that left me shaking.

First, she allways had this slightly dry I don't care at***ude. It never meant much to me before but, WTF, this lady is beyond burn out. She really does not care about the parties or attorneys appearing before her. She comments and acts as if reading a motion is a chore (or she will say she did not read it) and she is not shy to tell you that.

I heard perfectly plausable legal arguments responded to by Grimes with a "I don't care if the law says that, this is what you will do..." I don't remember this before but today she will award $3,500 or more in sanctions on a single motion even if it sounded like the attorney sanctioned was acting reasonably.

But it is her "I don't care at***ude" which just screams lack of judicial temperment. I don't know if she has now lost interest because she has a fraction of the salary she or would have had at Gibson Dunn if she was still in private practice, or she has some serious personal family issues. She simply does NOT enjoy being a judge. Being a judge is an honor, a priviledge and she simply does not care.

The other poster said she favors government and big business. Probably, she does seem to have disdain for the average personal injury plaintiff's attorney. I'm a corporate defense lawyer and she does seem to side with the defense/insurance bar even if she denies demurrers, so I can't complain, but it is just not fun, and is scary, to be before her. I'd avoid her. SM has so many good judges that if you dinged her you could not go wrong.

[The Underdog]

I really shouldn't call an Appellate Court Justice a bitch, but as I am a dog, while she is cute, Elizabeth Grimes in my limited experience, and from what about 100 other dogs have told me, was, and still is a bitch and should not be a judge.

I found this web site, and looked into it and it is 100% accurate from what I can tell. Too bad voter apathy and probably the lack of time to spread the word allowed her to be "elected". Then again, I think she does less damage to us on the Court of Appeals as opposed to the trial courts. So maybe its not such a bad thing after all.:confused:

Checkout http://www.judgeelizabethgrimes.com/index.cfm/2010/10/29/Justice-Elizabeth-A-Grimes-Record-of-Reversals