Judge Mark A. Young

Judge Mark A. Young sits at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Los Angeles County Superior Court, having been appointed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger on November 5, 2008. His docket has included high-profile, complex civil litigation: he presided over Wade Robson's lawsuit against the Michael Jackson estate, which he dismissed in 2021, as well as related Michael Jackson sexual abuse lawsuits that were subsequently revived by an appellate court. He also handled a trade secrets lawsuit brought by CAA against Range, which he dismissed in August 2025. Judge Young has a Commission on Judicial Performance record, which attorneys should independently research before appearing before him. The cases publicly associated with Judge Young share a common thread: high-stakes, heavily litigated civil matters involving entertainment industry parties, complex procedural histories, and significant public attention. His dismissal rulings in both the Robson matter and the CAA v. Range matter demonstrate a willingness to resolve cases at the pleading or pre-trial stage when he finds the legal basis insufficient. The appellate reversal of his ruling in the related Michael Jackson lawsuits is a documented part of his record and signals that his threshold for dismissal in that litigation was ultimately found to be too high by the reviewing court.

Attorneys appearing before Judge Young should be prepared for a judge who has demonstrated a readiness to dismiss cases on substantive legal grounds, as evidenced by his dismissals in the Robson matter and the CAA v. Range trade secrets case. If you are a defendant seeking dismissal, the record supports the argument that well-grounded motions to dismiss or demurrers receive serious consideration from this judge. If you are a plaintiff, the appellate reversal of his dismissal in the related Michael Jackson lawsuits is a concrete data point showing that his dismissal rulings have been successfully challenged on appeal, so preserving the record for appeal is critical. Given the entertainment industry and intellectual property character of the cases associated with Judge Young, attorneys handling trade secrets, entertainment contracts, or complex civil matters should ensure their pleadings and motions are legally precise and grounded in California statutory and case law. The CAA v. Range dismissal in August 2025 suggests he scrutinizes trade secrets claims carefully. Attorneys should not rely on factual complexity alone to survive a motion to dismiss — the legal theory must be clearly articulated and supported.

• critical

  Research CJP Record Before Appearance

  Judge Young has a Commission on Judicial Performance record. Attorneys should independently obtain and review the details of any CJP proceedings to assess whether any recusal or disclosure obligations arise and to understand the full context of his judicial record.

• critical

  Stress-Test Pleadings Against Dismissal

  Given his documented willingness to dismiss cases at the pleading stage in both the Robson and CAA v. Range matters, plaintiff-side attorneys must ensure every element of each cause of action is explicitly and adequately pleaded. Do not assume factual detail alone will survive scrutiny.

• important

  Prepare Appellate Preservation Strategy

  The appellate reversal of his dismissal in the related Michael Jackson lawsuits demonstrates that his rulings are not immune to appellate correction. Attorneys on the losing side of a dismissal should ensure the record is fully preserved for appeal.

• important

  Review Trade Secrets Dismissal in CAA v. Range

  For any trade secrets matter, the August 2025 dismissal of the CAA v. Range case is directly relevant. Attorneys should review the basis for that dismissal to understand what legal deficiencies Judge Young identified in trade secrets pleadings.

• Nice

  Anticipate Procedural Rigor in Entertainment Disputes

  Judge Young's docket has included major entertainment industry litigation. Attorneys in entertainment-related cases should expect a judge familiar with the procedural complexity and public profile of such matters and should be prepared for thorough judicial engagement.

• ›Be prepared to defend the legal sufficiency of your pleadings and motions on their merits — Judge Young's record shows he rules on substantive legal grounds.
• ›Do not assume that a high-profile case or sympathetic facts will insulate your claims from dismissal; his record includes dismissals in nationally prominent cases.
• ›If you are appellate counsel reviewing a trial court record from Judge Young, scrutinize dismissal orders carefully, as at least one has been reversed on appeal.