Judge Elihu M. Berle

Judge Elihu M. Berle has served on the Los Angeles Superior Court since his appointment by Governor Gray Davis in January 2001, accumulating over two decades of experience on one of the nation's busiest trial courts. A UCLA School of Law graduate, Judge Berle has become one of the most prominent complex litigation judges in California, particularly in the areas of consumer protection, public health regulation, and class action matters. His most defining public moment came in March 2018 when he ruled in the Proposition 65 acrylamide/coffee litigation — commonly called the Starbucks trial — that coffee sold in California required cancer warning labels under Prop 65. That ruling, while later reversed in August 2020 following regulatory action by OEHHA, demonstrated his willingness to engage deeply with competing scientific and expert testimony and to issue bold rulings in high-stakes, politically sensitive matters. He has also presided over the Brazilian Blowout class action settlement approval in 2021, indicating familiarity with the procedural and substantive demands of class action fairness hearings. Reports of a $2.5 million sanction involving PwC further suggest a judge who is not reluctant to use the court's coercive powers to enforce compliance and deter misconduct. Overall, Judge Berle presents as a methodical, intellectually engaged jurist who takes complex evidentiary records seriously and is willing to make difficult, high-profile decisions — even when those decisions carry significant public and commercial consequences.

Attorneys appearing before Judge Berle should prioritize evidentiary rigor and expert witness credibility above all else. His handling of the Prop 65 acrylamide litigation — which required him to evaluate dueling scientific experts on carcinogenicity and regulatory standards — signals that he will scrutinize the qualifications, methodology, and internal consistency of expert testimony closely. Attorneys relying on expert witnesses should ensure those experts are prepared for rigorous cross-examination and that their opinions are grounded in peer-reviewed, methodologically sound science. Vague or conclusory expert declarations are unlikely to carry weight with this judge. In class action and consumer protection matters, attorneys should expect Judge Berle to conduct a thorough fairness analysis and to probe settlement terms carefully, as evidenced by his involvement in the Brazilian Blowout settlement approval. Counsel seeking approval of class settlements should prepare detailed documentation of the negotiation process, class member benefit calculations, and fee justifications. On the sanctions front, the reported PwC matter suggests Judge Berle is willing to impose significant financial penalties for discovery abuse or litigation misconduct — attorneys should ensure their clients and co-counsel are in full compliance with all court orders and discovery obligations. Proactive communication with the court about any compliance issues is strongly preferable to being caught in a violation.

• critical

  Prepare Expert Witnesses for Rigorous Judicial Scrutiny

  Given Judge Berle's demonstrated ability to evaluate competing scientific expert testimony in the Prop 65 acrylamide litigation, all expert witnesses must be thoroughly prepared. Ensure CVs are current, methodologies are documented and defensible, and experts can clearly explain the basis for their opinions in plain language. Anticipate that the judge will ask probing questions from the bench.

• critical

  Audit Discovery Compliance Before Every Hearing

  The reported $2.5 million PwC sanction signals a judge who takes discovery obligations and court order compliance seriously. Before any appearance, conduct a full audit of outstanding discovery obligations, ensure all court-ordered deadlines have been met, and document compliance efforts. If any issues exist, address them proactively with opposing counsel and the court.

• important

  Prepare Detailed Regulatory and Statutory Analysis

  In any matter involving regulatory schemes, consumer protection statutes, or public health law, prepare a thorough analysis of the applicable statutory text, legislative history, and agency interpretations. Judge Berle has demonstrated comfort with this level of analysis in the Prop 65 context and will likely expect it in similar matters.

• important

  Document Class Action Settlement Terms Comprehensively

  For class action matters, prepare detailed documentation supporting settlement fairness, including negotiation history, class member benefit analysis, fee calculations with lodestar support, and comparisons to similar settlements. Judge Berle's approval of the Brazilian Blowout settlement suggests he conducts a genuine fairness review rather than a rubber-stamp analysis.

• important

  Research Any Recent Rulings or Tentative Decisions

  Given the limited data available on this judge's current practices, attorneys should research any recent published or unpublished rulings, tentative decisions posted on the LASC website, and any available attorney commentary through bar association networks or legal research platforms before appearing.

• Nice

  Prepare for Bench Questions on Scientific Methodology

  In any case involving technical or scientific evidence, prepare to answer detailed questions from the bench about research methodology, peer review status, sample sizes, and the weight of scientific consensus. Judge Berle's engagement with acrylamide science suggests he will not simply defer to expert credentials alone.

• ›Present arguments with precision and evidentiary grounding — Judge Berle's background in complex scientific litigation suggests he values substance over rhetorical flourish. Cite specific record evidence and legal authority rather than making broad characterizations.
• ›Be fully prepared to address regulatory and statutory history if your case involves any consumer protection, public health, or regulatory compliance issues. Superficial statutory arguments are unlikely to satisfy a judge who has navigated the full complexity of Prop 65 litigation.
• ›Treat discovery obligations and court orders as absolute — given the reported sanctions history, any appearance of non-compliance or cavalier treatment of court-ordered deadlines is likely to draw a sharp response from the bench.
• ›If appearing in a class action matter, be prepared to justify every material term of any proposed settlement, including fee requests, with specific factual and legal support. Expect a substantive fairness inquiry rather than a perfunctory review.
• ›Maintain professional decorum and avoid personal attacks on opposing counsel or witnesses. A judge who has presided over high-profile, contentious public interest litigation for over two decades will have little patience for unprofessional conduct that distracts from the merits.