The Honorable Angel M. Bermudez

Riverside County Superior Court, Department S302

Biography

The Hon. Angel M. Bermudez is a judge for the Riverside County Superior Court in California. He was appointed to the bench by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2007. He filled the vacancy created by the retirement of the Hon. B.J. Bjork (Ret.).

Bermudez is a registered Republican.

Judge Bermudez graduated with his B.A. in English literature, American literature, and American history from the University of California, Los Angeles in 1988. He went on to earn his J.D. from the University of San Diego School of Law in 1991.

His first job after law school was as a deputy district attorney for the Riverside County District Attorney's Office, where he worked from 1991 to 2002.

He left the D.A.'s office in 2002 to start his own firm but would return to Riverside County the next year. After rejoining the D.A.'s office, Bermudez would rise to the rank of senior deputy district attorney and would remain in that position until his appointment to the Superior Court in 2007. During his tenure at the D.A.'s office, he would be assigned to the Homicide Unit.

For his work with the D.A.'s office, Bermudez received the Outstanding Achievement Award in 2000 and the Felony Prosecutor of the Year Award in 2005.

While on the bench, Judge Bermudez has presided over various assignments including family law, limited civil, unlawful detainers, criminal trials, and drug court.

After garnering mock trial experience in law school, Judge Bermudez also served as the coach for the national mock trial team.

Judge Bermudez is also a talented artist and enjoys painting in his free time.

Recent Rulings by Hon. Angel M. Bermudez

  • TOWNSEND VS GELLATTI ENTERPRISESES INC

    Feb 24, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is unopposed and is therefore deemed conceded by the opposing party. The one paragraph Complaint is woefully deficient to provide sufficient notice. The Motion is GRANTED and Leave to Amend of 10 days also Granted.

    ...

  • ROSA VS HOLT

    Feb 23, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Third Amended Complaint was improperly filed and is STRICKEN.. Plaintiff must obtain a stipulation from all parties or obtain leave to file the TAC on noticed motion in compliance with CRC 3.1324. The argument that there was a stipulation is not persuasive as Counsel for Harney was not a party to it.

  • GEORGE VS TEMECULA VALLEY HOSPITAL

    Feb 23, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is continued to June 29, 2021. Insufficient notice was given for the hearing. Notice was improper because the motion was served via email on 12/8/20. C.C.P. § 1010.6 (a)(4)(B) requires two court days of additional notice, if the matter is electronically served. Here, only one court day of additi...

  • WARDAK VS CHI MOTION TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST

    Feb 23, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED.

    Plaintiff is prejudiced by having to depose new expert witnesses not previously retained. Plaintiff already deposed defendants’ retained plastic surgeon Dr. Jeffrey Rosenberg, M.D. on December 5, 2019 and relied on this testimony to prepare for trial. (Harmeling Decl., ¶ 14.) ...

  • BADDGOR VS VAN KLEINWEE

    Feb 22, 2021 |  Riverside County

    See 2.

    ...

  • GEORGE VS TEMECULA VALLEY HOSPITAL

    Feb 22, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is continued to June 22. 2021. Insufficient notice was given for the hearing. Notice was improper because the motion was served via email on 12/8/20. C.C.P. § 1010.6 (a)(4)(B) requires two court days of additional notice, if the matter is electronically served. Here, only one court day of additi...

  • BALFOUR VS FLINT

    Feb 18, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED.

    The complaint alleges that Flint had been aware for a substantial period of time that he had a serious problem with alcohol and drug use. (Complaint, ¶ 26.) He was well aware of the serious nature of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, but had a history/habit ...

  • KINGS GARDEN INC VS MONTANTE

    Feb 17, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The hearings are continued to April 14, 2021.

    Defendant is ordered to meet and confer in person or by phone with Plaintiff who filed the FAC for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections raised in the demurrer and motion to strike. As part of t...

  • QUIROZ VS THE ENERGUY INC

    Feb 17, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel Further Responses from Defendant Stephanie Smith as to Demand Nos. 21 and 22 is GRANTED. Sanctions of $1317.50 are awarded. Both responses and sanctions are due in 30 days. The court will not entertain oral argument.

    Defendant has not provided any reason why information concern...

  • WIECZOREK VS TARGET EQUITY, LLC

    Feb 17, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The court cannot locate the proof of service of the motion. It this is in error and it was timely filed, the moving party may request oral argument with proof of service and of filing the proof of service. If not, the motion will be continued for the proof of service to be filed.

    ...

  • WESTBROOK VS ITEC FINANCIAL INC.

    Feb 16, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The matter is assigned a TSC on May 17, 2021. The Motion is GRANTED. Counsel is to notify the client of this order and the TSC date. Upon proof of service being filed, counsel is relieved.

    ...

  • BALL VS JOHNSON

    Feb 16, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is GRANTED.

    ...

  • CLAY VS COMBS

    Feb 10, 2021 |  Riverside County

    Moot.

    ...

  • CLEMONS VS HOLIDAY AL MANAGEMENT SUB LLC

    Feb 09, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED.

    CCP §1281.98 does not define the term “paid” such that the court should find that the term means actually received and applied to the account by JAMS. Here, the “evidence” shows that Defendant mailed a check in October (presumably within the 30- day grace period, but no actual...

  • BREAKFIELD VS GI EXCELLENCE, INC.

    Feb 08, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED. The Motion for Summary Judgment was timely filed and noticed.

    Plaintiff argues that the Motion is untimely. A motion for summary judgment requires a 75-day notice, which is increased to 80 days if served by mail to an address within California. (Cal. Code Civ. Pro. §437c(a).) ...

  • COPP VS VAAPESCAPE, INC

    Feb 04, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion as to requests for production 18 and 23 is DENIED. The Motion as to the remaining requests for production (1-3, 6, 8-11, 14-17, 19 and 22) is GRANTED. Sanctions are DENIED. The court will not entertain oral argument.

    Defendant properly objected to the original request for document produc...

  • OROZCO VS IE RENTAL HOMES

    Feb 04, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The RJN is GRANTED within the parameters of Scott v. JP Morgan Chase Bank (2013) 214 Cal. App. 4th 743, 755, as to the Grant Deed recorded August 18, 2015. The Demurrer is OVERRULED. The court will not entertain oral argument.

    Through paragraphs 11, 35 and 36, the causes of action are sufficiently ...

  • FORD VS GUZMAN

    Feb 01, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed motion is GRANTED. Trial is Set for December 10, 2021.

    ...

  • PYLES-CLOSE VS MACHADO

    Jan 27, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed Motion is GRANTED with sanctions of $300.00. Responses without objection and sanctions are due in 30 days.

    If opposition has been filed and the opposing party has proof of such, then the opposing party should contact the courtroom immediately at 951-704-7530. Otherwise, the motion is ...

  • SANTOS VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC

    Jan 26, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Demurrer is OVERRULED and the Motion to Strike is DENIED. Answer due in 30 days. 3COA (CC section 1793.2(a)(3): Plaintiffs sufficiently allege the ultimate fact that Defendant does not have sufficient repair facilities or that it has insufficient service literature and replacement parts, to repair the ...

  • SD PREMIERE PROPERTIES, LLC VS MAINSTREAM INVESTMENT, LLC

    Jan 25, 2021 |  Riverside County

    A tentative is not complete. The parties may appear to argue, if they wish. If the parties do not, then the court will issue its ruling likely by noon of January 25.

    ...

  • WRENCH VS ST. PIERRE

    Jan 21, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Demurrer is SUSTAINED for failure to state sufficient facts with Leave to Amend of 10 days.

    A fraud claim based on affirmative misrepresentations requires (1) a misrepresentation of a material fact (consisting of a false representation, concealment or non-disclosure); (2) knowledge of the falsi...

  • TEJEDA VS GUTIERREZ

    Jan 21, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED.

    Before a referee for accounting may occur, the contract disputes must be resolved. CCP §639(a)(1) allows the appointment of a referee “because a trained accountant is generally better able to efficiently and inexpensively examine a ‘long account’ than a trial court judge is ab...

  • A. VS AEROSPORTS TRAMPOLINE PARKS, LLC

    Jan 20, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion and Sanctions are DENIED.

    This is a right of privacy concern. Defendants provided no particularized need or the direct relevance of Plaintiff’s school records. Defendants fail to show how any suspension or disciplinary records relate to the TBI, post-concussive syndrome, depression and a...

  • See More Results

Recent Rulings by Hon. Angel M. Bermudez

  • TOWNSEND VS GELLATTI ENTERPRISESES INC

    Feb 24, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is unopposed and is therefore deemed conceded by the opposing party. The one paragraph Complaint is woefully deficient to provide sufficient notice. The Motion is GRANTED and Leave to Amend of 10 days also Granted.

    ...

  • ROSA VS HOLT

    Feb 23, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Third Amended Complaint was improperly filed and is STRICKEN.. Plaintiff must obtain a stipulation from all parties or obtain leave to file the TAC on noticed motion in compliance with CRC 3.1324. The argument that there was a stipulation is not persuasive as Counsel for Harney was not a party to it.

  • GEORGE VS TEMECULA VALLEY HOSPITAL

    Feb 23, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is continued to June 29, 2021. Insufficient notice was given for the hearing. Notice was improper because the motion was served via email on 12/8/20. C.C.P. § 1010.6 (a)(4)(B) requires two court days of additional notice, if the matter is electronically served. Here, only one court day of additi...

  • WARDAK VS CHI MOTION TO AUGMENT EXPERT WITNESS LIST

    Feb 23, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED.

    Plaintiff is prejudiced by having to depose new expert witnesses not previously retained. Plaintiff already deposed defendants’ retained plastic surgeon Dr. Jeffrey Rosenberg, M.D. on December 5, 2019 and relied on this testimony to prepare for trial. (Harmeling Decl., ¶ 14.) ...

  • BADDGOR VS VAN KLEINWEE

    Feb 22, 2021 |  Riverside County

    See 2.

    ...

  • GEORGE VS TEMECULA VALLEY HOSPITAL

    Feb 22, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is continued to June 22. 2021. Insufficient notice was given for the hearing. Notice was improper because the motion was served via email on 12/8/20. C.C.P. § 1010.6 (a)(4)(B) requires two court days of additional notice, if the matter is electronically served. Here, only one court day of additi...

  • BALFOUR VS FLINT

    Feb 18, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED.

    The complaint alleges that Flint had been aware for a substantial period of time that he had a serious problem with alcohol and drug use. (Complaint, ¶ 26.) He was well aware of the serious nature of driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, but had a history/habit ...

  • KINGS GARDEN INC VS MONTANTE

    Feb 17, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The hearings are continued to April 14, 2021.

    Defendant is ordered to meet and confer in person or by phone with Plaintiff who filed the FAC for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections raised in the demurrer and motion to strike. As part of t...

  • QUIROZ VS THE ENERGUY INC

    Feb 17, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Compel Further Responses from Defendant Stephanie Smith as to Demand Nos. 21 and 22 is GRANTED. Sanctions of $1317.50 are awarded. Both responses and sanctions are due in 30 days. The court will not entertain oral argument.

    Defendant has not provided any reason why information concern...

  • WIECZOREK VS TARGET EQUITY, LLC

    Feb 17, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The court cannot locate the proof of service of the motion. It this is in error and it was timely filed, the moving party may request oral argument with proof of service and of filing the proof of service. If not, the motion will be continued for the proof of service to be filed.

    ...

  • WESTBROOK VS ITEC FINANCIAL INC.

    Feb 16, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The matter is assigned a TSC on May 17, 2021. The Motion is GRANTED. Counsel is to notify the client of this order and the TSC date. Upon proof of service being filed, counsel is relieved.

    ...

  • BALL VS JOHNSON

    Feb 16, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is GRANTED.

    ...

  • CLAY VS COMBS

    Feb 10, 2021 |  Riverside County

    Moot.

    ...

  • CLEMONS VS HOLIDAY AL MANAGEMENT SUB LLC

    Feb 09, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED.

    CCP §1281.98 does not define the term “paid” such that the court should find that the term means actually received and applied to the account by JAMS. Here, the “evidence” shows that Defendant mailed a check in October (presumably within the 30- day grace period, but no actual...

  • BREAKFIELD VS GI EXCELLENCE, INC.

    Feb 08, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED. The Motion for Summary Judgment was timely filed and noticed.

    Plaintiff argues that the Motion is untimely. A motion for summary judgment requires a 75-day notice, which is increased to 80 days if served by mail to an address within California. (Cal. Code Civ. Pro. §437c(a).) ...

  • COPP VS VAAPESCAPE, INC

    Feb 04, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion as to requests for production 18 and 23 is DENIED. The Motion as to the remaining requests for production (1-3, 6, 8-11, 14-17, 19 and 22) is GRANTED. Sanctions are DENIED. The court will not entertain oral argument.

    Defendant properly objected to the original request for document produc...

  • OROZCO VS IE RENTAL HOMES

    Feb 04, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The RJN is GRANTED within the parameters of Scott v. JP Morgan Chase Bank (2013) 214 Cal. App. 4th 743, 755, as to the Grant Deed recorded August 18, 2015. The Demurrer is OVERRULED. The court will not entertain oral argument.

    Through paragraphs 11, 35 and 36, the causes of action are sufficiently ...

  • FORD VS GUZMAN

    Feb 01, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed motion is GRANTED. Trial is Set for December 10, 2021.

    ...

  • PYLES-CLOSE VS MACHADO

    Jan 27, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed Motion is GRANTED with sanctions of $300.00. Responses without objection and sanctions are due in 30 days.

    If opposition has been filed and the opposing party has proof of such, then the opposing party should contact the courtroom immediately at 951-704-7530. Otherwise, the motion is ...

  • SANTOS VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC

    Jan 26, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Demurrer is OVERRULED and the Motion to Strike is DENIED. Answer due in 30 days. 3COA (CC section 1793.2(a)(3): Plaintiffs sufficiently allege the ultimate fact that Defendant does not have sufficient repair facilities or that it has insufficient service literature and replacement parts, to repair the ...

  • SD PREMIERE PROPERTIES, LLC VS MAINSTREAM INVESTMENT, LLC

    Jan 25, 2021 |  Riverside County

    A tentative is not complete. The parties may appear to argue, if they wish. If the parties do not, then the court will issue its ruling likely by noon of January 25.

    ...

  • WRENCH VS ST. PIERRE

    Jan 21, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Demurrer is SUSTAINED for failure to state sufficient facts with Leave to Amend of 10 days.

    A fraud claim based on affirmative misrepresentations requires (1) a misrepresentation of a material fact (consisting of a false representation, concealment or non-disclosure); (2) knowledge of the falsi...

  • TEJEDA VS GUTIERREZ

    Jan 21, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion is DENIED.

    Before a referee for accounting may occur, the contract disputes must be resolved. CCP §639(a)(1) allows the appointment of a referee “because a trained accountant is generally better able to efficiently and inexpensively examine a ‘long account’ than a trial court judge is ab...

  • A. VS AEROSPORTS TRAMPOLINE PARKS, LLC

    Jan 20, 2021 |  Riverside County

    The Motion and Sanctions are DENIED.

    This is a right of privacy concern. Defendants provided no particularized need or the direct relevance of Plaintiff’s school records. Defendants fail to show how any suspension or disciplinary records relate to the TBI, post-concussive syndrome, depression and a...

  • See More Results

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.