Michael J. Imhoff
B
73% — 69 of 94 rulings upheld, per qwen3.8-27b; in the top 28% of 312 graded judges
On the assumption that the model is right — qwen3.8-27b reads the court's own disposition right 70% of the time, graded on a curve: A is the top fifth of the judges graded under this model, F the bottom fifth; ++ / + / − / −− within the band. How the grade is made.
66cases reviewed on appeal
18%reversed, in whole or part, of 62 merits decisions
Outcomes on appeal
affirmed 51 reversed 6 reversed in part 5 writ denied 3 dismissed 1
Areas
By year: 2013 21 · 2014 15 · 2015 9 · 2016 6 · 2022 4 · 2023 3 · 2020 2 · 2017 2 · 2021 1 · 2018 1 · 1998 1 · 1992 1 ·
Analysis
128reviewed cases analysed
315rulings read
0rulings where the model disagrees with the court
20cases with a verified missed authority
0appellate opinions called questionable
Counts of a model's readings across this judge's reviewed cases, each shown on its case page beside the court's disposition. Not a finding about the judge.
Cases
- In re Bella P. CA4/1
- In re N,R. CA4/1
- Dalia C. v. Super. Ct. CA4/1
- In re Jocelyn G. CA4/1
- Adoption of Anthony F. CA4/1
- In re Natalie L. CA4/1
- San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. Alejandro G.
- In re Jacob L. CA4/1
- In re Brianna S. CA4/1
- In re J.M. CA4/1
- In re A.B. CA4/1
- In re Lizbeth J. CA4/1
- In re Victoria G. CA4/1
- T.B. v. Superior Court CA4/1
- In re Heidi M. CA4/1
- In re Abigail J. CA4/1
- In re J.R. CA4/1
- San Diego County Health & Human Services Agency v. D.L.
- In re Alisha S. CA4/1
- In re Kylee H. CA4/1
- In re Maya C. CA4/1
- In re Nevaeh CA4/1
- In re Mary B. CA4/1
- In re Natalie B. CA4/1
- In re Tabitha K. CA4/1