Judge Marc D. Gross

Judge Marc D. Gross serves on the Los Angeles Superior Court at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, appointed by Governor Jerry Brown in December 2012. His appointment was part of a cohort of 11 Democratic appointees to the LA County Superior Court. He has presided over high-profile commercial litigation, including the Fox v. Netflix executive poaching dispute, which received coverage in June 2019 and December 2021, demonstrating his assignment to complex, commercially significant matters. Judge Gross has been recognized by the Daily Journal in May 2024 for successful mediation work, a distinction that reflects a documented orientation toward dispute resolution and settlement facilitation. This recognition is a concrete data point — not merely an inference — that his approach to litigation includes active engagement with settlement processes. Because no ruling analyses or attorney observations are available in the current dataset, the depth of insight into his procedural preferences, motion practice tendencies, or courtroom demeanor is limited. Attorneys should treat the guidance below as grounded in the available public record and supplement it with direct research into his recent docket activity on Trellis or the LA Superior Court's online portal.

Given Judge Gross's documented recognition for mediation work, attorneys should arrive prepared to engage substantively with settlement discussions. Judges recognized for mediation skill tend to probe the parties' settlement postures during case management conferences and hearings. Attorneys who can articulate a clear, reasoned settlement position — and demonstrate good-faith engagement with resolution — align with the values this judge has been publicly recognized for. The Fox v. Netflix executive poaching matter signals that Judge Gross has handled sophisticated commercial disputes involving employment, contract, and competitive business practices. Attorneys in complex commercial cases should present well-organized, record-supported arguments and anticipate a judge familiar with nuanced business litigation dynamics. Precision in briefing and clarity in framing commercial disputes will serve counsel well. Because no ruling analyses are currently available, attorneys should independently review Judge Gross's recent tentative rulings and minute orders through the LA Superior Court's online system before any appearance. This direct research will provide the most current and reliable picture of his procedural expectations and substantive tendencies.

• critical

  Review Recent Docket and Tentative Rulings

  No ruling analyses are available in this dataset. Before any appearance, pull Judge Gross's recent tentative rulings and minute orders from the LA Superior Court online portal and Trellis to identify current procedural expectations and substantive tendencies.

• critical

  Prepare a Substantive Settlement Position

  Given his documented recognition for mediation, be prepared to articulate a clear, good-faith settlement posture at any case management conference or hearing. Vague or dismissive responses to settlement inquiries are inconsistent with his recognized strengths.

• important

  Organize Commercial Litigation Materials Precisely

  His experience with the Fox v. Netflix matter confirms exposure to complex commercial disputes. Briefs and oral arguments should be tightly organized, with clear factual records and precise legal framing suited to a judge experienced in business litigation.

• important

  Research Local Rules and Department-Specific Procedures

  Stanley Mosk Courthouse departments have specific standing orders and local rules. Confirm the current standing orders for Judge Gross's department before filing or appearing.

• ›Demonstrate genuine engagement with settlement and resolution options — Judge Gross has been publicly recognized for mediation, and dismissive attitudes toward settlement are inconsistent with his documented values.
• ›Prepare thoroughly for commercial litigation matters; his presiding over the Fox v. Netflix dispute confirms he is experienced with sophisticated business cases and will expect counsel to match that level of preparation.
• ›Consult the court's online portal for any standing orders or department-specific rules before appearing, as these govern procedural expectations that are not captured in the current dataset.
• ›Be concise and record-grounded in oral argument; judges handling complex commercial matters typically value precision over rhetorical volume.