Judge Randolph M. Hammock

Judge Randolph M. Hammock has served on the Los Angeles County Superior Court since 2011, following election in 2010 after a prior unsuccessful bid in 2006. His pre-bench career spans nearly three decades of civil litigation in private practice, covering probate, civil rights, and family law, supplemented by service as a volunteer judge pro tem from 1998 to 2007 and as a full-time Dependency Court referee from 2007 to 2010. This breadth of civil litigation experience across multiple substantive areas distinguishes him from judges who came to the bench through a narrower practice background. Judge Hammock has attracted public attention for his handling of high-profile matters, including a defamation lawsuit involving A$AP Rocky and A$AP Relli, in which he actively urged the plaintiff to reconsider the claims — a notable instance of judicial candor from the bench. He has also presided over a retaliation suit against Disney and litigation connected to actor Johnny Wactor's death. His docket reflects exposure to entertainment industry disputes, civil rights claims, and complex civil matters consistent with the Stanley Mosk Courthouse's general civil jurisdiction. On judicial administration and policy, Judge Hammock has taken a public stance on judicial elections and ballot designations, authoring an article on the subject and advocating for voter education rather than elimination of judicial elections. He has also acknowledged and engaged with appellate criticism regarding implicit bias, demonstrating a willingness to address difficult institutional topics publicly. His admission to the bar in 15 states and membership in the American Board of Trial Advocates signal a broad professional network and commitment to trial advocacy standards.

Attorneys appearing before Judge Hammock should recognize that he brings extensive civil litigation experience from private practice across multiple substantive areas. His background as a civil litigator — not a specialist in a single field — means he is conversant with procedural and substantive arguments across probate, civil rights, family law, and general civil matters. Arguments should be grounded in clear legal authority and practical litigation logic rather than overly academic framing. Judge Hammock's on-the-record urging of the plaintiff in the A$AP Relli defamation matter to reconsider claims signals a willingness to communicate frank assessments of case strength from the bench. Attorneys should be prepared for direct judicial engagement on the merits and should not treat bench comments as mere procedural formality. If the judge signals skepticism about a claim or defense, counsel should be ready to respond substantively in real time rather than deferring to written submissions. Given his public engagement with appellate criticism on implicit bias and his authorship of articles on judicial elections, Judge Hammock demonstrates intellectual engagement with meta-level legal and institutional questions. Attorneys who present well-organized, intellectually honest arguments — including candid acknowledgment of weaknesses — are better positioned than those who rely on one-sided advocacy without addressing counterarguments. His membership in the American Board of Trial Advocates further reflects a professional orientation toward rigorous trial practice.

• critical

  Prepare Real-Time Responses to Judicial Skepticism

  Given Judge Hammock's documented practice of urging parties to reconsider claims from the bench, counsel must prepare substantive oral responses to anticipated judicial challenges — not just written briefs. Anticipate the weakest points in your case and have direct answers ready.

• critical

  Ensure Record Supports Explicit Legal Reasoning

  In light of appellate attention to Judge Hammock's rulings and his acknowledged engagement with implicit bias criticism, attorneys should build a record with explicit, well-documented legal reasoning at every stage to preserve and protect appellate options.

• important

  Review Entertainment and Civil Rights Precedents if Relevant

  Judge Hammock has presided over entertainment industry disputes and civil rights-adjacent matters. Attorneys in those subject areas should ensure familiarity with the specific precedents most relevant to his documented docket experience.

• important

  Prepare Intellectually Honest Briefing

  Judge Hammock's public advocacy and article authorship reflect engagement with difficult institutional questions. Briefs that acknowledge counterarguments and address them directly are better suited to his demonstrated intellectual orientation than one-sided advocacy.

• important

  Confirm Procedural Compliance Across All Jurisdictions

  With bar admission in 15 states and broad civil litigation experience, Judge Hammock has exposure to varied procedural frameworks. Ensure all filings strictly comply with California and local Los Angeles Superior Court rules, as procedural shortcuts are unlikely to pass unnoticed.

• Nice

  Review Any Prior Appellate Decisions in Your Case Type

  The profile notes appellate attention to Judge Hammock's rulings. Research any published appellate decisions arising from his courtroom in your subject matter area to understand how his rulings have been reviewed and where appellate courts have agreed or disagreed.

• ›Be prepared to engage substantively with direct questions or comments from the bench — Judge Hammock has demonstrated willingness to communicate frank assessments of case strength during proceedings.
• ›Maintain professional trial advocacy standards consistent with American Board of Trial Advocates membership expectations; sloppy or underprepared oral argument is inconsistent with the courtroom culture Judge Hammock has cultivated.
• ›Do not treat bench comments as mere procedural formality — when Judge Hammock signals concern about a claim or argument, respond directly and substantively rather than deflecting to written submissions.
• ›Ensure all filings and arguments reflect awareness of the broader legal principles at stake, not just narrow factual disputes, given his documented engagement with legal policy and institutional questions.
• ›Conduct yourself with awareness that high-profile matters before Judge Hammock have drawn media attention; maintain professional decorum consistent with a courtroom that operates under public scrutiny.