"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. RIchard S. Whitney	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
San Diego County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 4.5 - 8 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 1.0 - 8 rating(s)	Please send me alerts on this judge E-mail Address:

Add your own rating

E-Mail Address ()

* *

Confirm E-mail Address

* * *

Zip

Occupation

Add a comment only

Only items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating.

General Rating Criteria

* Temperament		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Scholarship		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Industriousness		(1=Not at all industrious,10=Highly industrious)
* Ability to Handle Complex Litigation		(1=Awful,10=Excellent)
* Punctuality		(1=Chronically Late,10=Always on Time)
* General Ability to Handle Pre-Trial Matters		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
* General Ability as a Trial Judge		(1=Not all Able, 10=Extremely Able)
Flexibility In Scheduling		(1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)

Criminal Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation		(1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
General Inclination Regarding Bail		(1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Plea Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved, 10=Very Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Pretrial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Trial Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases Sentencing Stage		(1=Pro-prosecution,10=Pro-defense)

Civil Rating Criteria (if applicable)

* Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation		(1=Not at all Evenhanded,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Involvement in Settlement Discussions		(1=Not at all Involved,10=Very Involved)
General Inclination		(1=Pro-defendant, 10=Pro-plaintiff)

Comments

Please type what you see below:

Not an even number!

What others have said about Hon. RIchard S. Whitney

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA54178
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Supposedly, a motion (1473.6 Motion to Vacate) that I filed (by mail from Illinois) was lost and erroneously not filestamped by the court clerks. This was November of 2017. I filed a second motion in February of 2018 before the 1-year statute of limitations because I could not get confirmation that my first motion was received and filed. The second motion was missing an important section -- I filed this motion at the last minute (I am not an attorney). Judge Whitney denied my second motion within 30 days (no hearing). In his denial, there was a footnote indicating that he was aware of the first motion and that it was received at or around November 20, 2017, but no action would be taken on that motion as the second motion was deemed as an amendment to the first motion. It took me until July of 2018 to find out that the court clerks did not filestamp by first motion with a date (that was why it was lost).

So, how did Judge Whitney know on March 8, 2018, that my first motion was received at or around November 20, 2017, if the court clerks did not filestamp it with a date when it was received?

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA53143
Rating:1.0

Comments:
In my 20+ years as an attorney, I am sorry to say that dealing with Judge Whitney has been the most challenging and disappointing experience. Most of the time he simply continues cases, resulting in a overly busy calendar. He does not seem to care about compliance with Rules of the Court, legal precedent or statutory authority. You get tentative rulings that don't make sense legally or logically and then get cut off at oral argument because he has other matters pending. (Perhaps if he actually ruled rather then simply continue matters, the calendar would free up.) It is very disappointing to see that justice is not being carried out in this court room and litigants are forced to wait for years before they finally get to go to trial.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA48488
Rating:1.0

Comments:
It is shocking that Whitney is still on the bench. He needs to be removed for public safety. If you have any information, please email me. Thank you.

Litigant

Comment #: CA47358
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Whitney is a bad representation of the judicial system. He notoriously allows fraudulent lawsuits to pass through his department. Very sad that he was elected by default as nobody ran against him.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA42268
Rating:1.0

Comments:
POS for a judge!

Other

Comment #: CA42267
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Very poor and he should be reprimanded and disbarred immediately before he does more harm.
He’s a crook & a convicted felon!

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA39855
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Hi, this site is wonderful. I am so glad I found it. I don't know why my review keeps getting deleted. I think its very important to warn people.I recently filed a judicial complaint against Judge Richard S. Whitney. I agree with the others. His behavior is deplorable, dangerous, and a disgrace to our judicial system. If you are the underdog up against a big entity, I would file a CCP 170.6 or 170.1 motion to disqualify/recuse, immediately.

Litigant

Comment #: CA39845
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Why is everyone wasting their time on here!? Paper them with the Commissioners on Judicial Performance!

Litigant

Comment #: CA35362
Rating:1.0

Comments:
This is the most deplorable "judge" there is under the sun. In my case, a military man sued me for harassment (and I am 70 years old living in the same community for 30 years and this military man Parnell and his civilian wife rented next door. They collectively made 8 false 911 calls and false police reports (which they admitted to in court later). This despicable judge accepted 381 pages of evidence from these criminals and refused to accept 1 page of evidence in this claim and counterclaim case. This despicable Whitney gave me 20 minutes to defend Nathan Parnell and Julie parnell's claim and prove my counter claim. Wrote three minute orders with the last one in violation all statutes with incoherent and angry words WITHOUT ANY EVIDENCE. I filed a Petition to US Supreme Court (case no. 20-691) knowing it might not be heard. I alleged white supremacy and hate crime by PArnells and aided and abetted by this Whiteney. I also filed a Complaint with CA Commission on Judicial performance and this Whitney was found two counts of violation (not providing due process and writing an angry letter in violation of statutes and to vent his anger because his prize Parnells had to vacate from their home (not caused by me). I use "judge" for him because his conduct made him not even a human being.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA31414
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Everything you could ever want in a judge. Smart, fair, works hard, loves his job, likes lawyers, listens. Always a pleasure to appear in his court, where I have won a couple and lost one. A great draw in any case.

Other

Comment #: CA31037
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Whitney has heart and is one of the most strong-willed Judges when it comes to justice, fairness and equality. His courtroom, clerk and bailiff are wonderful and litigants are honored and respected before the law. I am grateful I was able to support him in his court.

Litigant

Comment #: CA29093
Rating:1.0

Comments:
When I filed for a restraining order it was denied. No one I asked could understand his reasoning. In an ex parte hearing I told him he did not understand the law. He replied 'court is in recess' and left the courtroom.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA29092
Rating:10.0

Comments:
An assiduous yet pragmatic Judge, and I've appeared before many Judge's in San Diego Superior. I've even observed Judge Whitney handle hearings for other attorneys and what stood out to me is that he remains even keeled, allows the attorney's the opportunity to persuade him otherwise, but at the same time, doesn't lose sight of the forest for the trees.

Litigant

Comment #: CA24459
Rating:1.0

Comments:
In 2018 I was evicted from Public Housing, LIONS COMMUNITY MANOR in San Diego. at age 72. I was made homeless.I received my eviction notice after I asked 'why are there 100 Chinese Residents here, but NO Blacks?' I found that there was a network of attorneys from the Landlord's lawyers in strategic places. One, DAVE ABAD, worked for the company executing the eviction AND in the city attorney's office AND had worked in the legal aid department where I was refused legal aid. During the eviction process I read many law books, and ultimately filed a restraining order against the manager, citing elder abuse. RICHARD WHITNEY was the judge. He wrote 'Real Estate Issues' and denied the injunction. I obtained an 'ex parte' hearing but Whitney said 'there is no connection between a restraining order and an eviction. Twice I said'you don't understand the law'. Then he said'court is in recess' and left. The next day I took the paperwork to the Legal Aid Department and asked a lawyer, Joseph Gonzales to read it and give his opinion. He stopped half way through and refused to continue.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA18908
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Judge Whitney is a very fair judge. He tries cases with compassion and care for the parties before him. He is very diligent and looks out for the interests of the parties beyond the purview of the case at hand. I found him to be an excellent Judicial Officer - grounded, ethical, and with a great sense of integrity. Judge Whitney is full of in depth knowledge, unparalleled experience, and has a thorough understanding of the parties of each case at hand. He is compassionate, full of heart, and his approach to the law is honest and realistic. I found him personable and relatable.

Other

Comment #: CA14934
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Granted restraining order based on hearsay.Did not look at accused paperwork showing he was not in the area when plaintiffs stated.

Litigant

Comment #: CA13879
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Why would a Judge swear everyone under oath and then never bother to ask the important questions, allowing the defendant to, in the very least, purger him/herself? There can exist reasonable deduction without evidence. It may not provide the desired outcome that evidence can provide, but the Judge fails the legal system if he does not ask the defendant yes/no has he/she committed the string of harassment, stalking, and intimidation threats (or other) that are the cause of the case itself. Thereby, again, in the very least, leaving the defendant knowing he has committed purgery if he choses to lie by saying no, when he knows he has committed such threatening behaviors. At least the plaintiff who is threatened receives some satisfaction from bringing the defendant to Court to expose his harmful and destructive behaviors.

Litigant

Comment #: CA13878
Rating:1.0

Comments:
definitely prejudicial and very questionable….judge/lawyer crony club…
lacks understanding, the ability to grasp the big picture and compassion.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8904
Rating:1.9

Comments:
Lack of proficiency. Very Prejudicial