Legal Knowledge: If you're pro se against an opposing side that is represented by an attorney with connections including political connections, she will not listen to you. You will not have due process. There is going to be procedural asymmetry.
Fairness & Impartiality: There is suspicion of exparte communications. The attorney on the opposite side has political connections. The attorney on the opposite side has violated or ignored the procedural rules and this judge has allowed that because it seems like she knows this attorney and because this attorney is politically connected and seems to be familiar with the staff the attorney has been able to violate due process and she has also. Meaningful participation what is that?
Judicial Temperament: She is not a fair judge. You call out the behavior she retaliates or places the blame on you.
Communication: we are still waiting for here to rule and set pending motions for hearing while opposing side motions get addressed quickly or the next day. dont expect her to discipline attorneys fraudulent or unethical behavior.
Timeliness: still waiting for my motions to be addressed or seen
★☆☆☆☆Litigant
Legal Knowledge: The judge and her judicial assistant exhibit a dismissive demeanor. They have consistently violated due process over an extended period and have failed to adhere to the established rules of their own circuit court. Furthermore, they schedule hearings without adequate coordination and demonstrate preferential treatment towards specific attorneys. They arrange motions for hearings for certain parties while neglecting others, resulting in a significant procedural imbalance.
Fairness & Impartiality: There is no fairness or impartiality if she knows the attorney in front of her. Even if that attorney is representing a party that has committed fraud, she overlooks it, even after being on notice.
She doesn't follow the circuit rules. Those only apply to whomever she feels they apply to.
Judicial Temperament: A fair judicial process necessitates the resolution of all pending filings and motions prior to advancing with a hearing. The current procedural tactics are quite concerning. Individuals representing minority groups, indigent litigants, those with disabilities, or those proceeding pro se, particularly when these characteristics intersect, should anticipate the need to vigorously advocate for their rights, navigate complex procedural requirements, or pursue alternative legal avenues.
Communication: The orders issued by the judge lack both legal reasoning and written findings. Requests for these elements, or for accommodations, are unlikely to be granted, and no justification for such denials is typically provided. Furthermore, the judicial assistant's conduct has been notably dismissive in my experience.
Timeliness: They don't address your motion on time. See previous comment. There is an evident procedural asymmetry.