Hon. Nancy G. Edmunds See Rating Details
District Judge See Comments
E.D.Mich.  
Average Rating:5.4 - 19 rating(s)
Please send me alerts on this judge
E-mail Address:



Add your own rating

E-Mail Address (will not be displayed)
Confirm E-mail Address
Zip
Occupation
Add a comment only

Ratings
*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=Chronic`y Late,10=Always on Time)
*Evenhandedness in Civil Litigation:    (1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
*Evenhandedness in Criminal Litigation:   (1=Demonstrates Bias,10=Entirely Evenhanded)
Flexibility In Scheduling   (1=Completely Inflexible,10=Very Flexible)
General Inclination Regarding Bail (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases, Pre-Trial:   (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
Involvement in Civil Settlement Discussions:   (1=Least Involved,10=Most Involved)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases, Trial:    (1=Pro-Defense,10=Pro-Government)
General Inclination in Criminal Cases, Sentencing:    (1=Most Lenient,10=Most Harsh)
Typical Discount Off Guidelines for Cooperators:    (1=10%,10=100%)
  Items marked with (*) are averaged into the displayed overall rating
Comments


Please type what you see below:

  

What others have said about Hon. Nancy G. Edmunds


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 32891
Rating:1.2
Comments:
Truly terrible judge. Beware of her blatant favoritism of her preferred lawyers and willingness to flout the law completely on their behalf. If you have not donated to whatever election campaign or committee these ppl have likely contributed do not consent to a bench trial unless you can hire an attorney who frequents her court. There are few ppl less well suited to the administration of justice or the upholding of law than this person.

Send e-mail to this poster 11/23/2019 8:14:14 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 21909
Rating:9.6
Comments:
I currently have a case in front of Judge Edmunds. She has been great and very fair. I have heard she leans a little more pro-employer in civil litigation but I believe she has been extremely fair. I have been beyond impressed with her intelligence and understanding of the issues prior to oral arguments. I agree to an extent with one of the comments below about her mind somewhat being made up prior to oral argument and looking at the clock...but let's be honest, your brief(s) should be able to get your argument across. Most lawyers just re-argue same points in their brief. I am mixed on the Kwame issue. Government officials should be held to a higher standard but 28yrs is a long time. Kwame was scum of scum though. No one is missing him in prison. I would not want to be a criminal in front of her.

Send e-mail to this poster 7/8/2014 4:25:09 PM

Litigant

Comment #: 21118
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Judge Edmunds is one of the smartest judges out there. I'm not sure if her haters recognize this, but she does have a lifetime appointment and has had this appointment for quite some time. As far as Kwame Kilpatrick or whatever the name is, check this out: Judge Edmunds did not write the Booker opinion, nor did she draft the 3553 factors to consider when imposing a sentence advised by the Sentencing Commission. Apparently, and in terms of the sentence imposed, she will generally give where she can, should there be a cause for the given. But, if I recall correctly, it was once said that our children pay for the mistakes that we as parents make. We can all agree that he is paying dearly -- not to mention he was just lame in office.

Send e-mail to this poster 10/12/2013 4:56:31 AM

Other

Comment #: 21117
Rating:8.0
Comments:
In my opinion Judge Edmunds has served the Eastern District of Michigan well as a member of the U.S. District Court. I had a matter before this judge several years ago and she was patient, kind and very fair with me.

With respect to the Kwame Kilpatrick matter, however, it is my opinion that the sentence imposed (28 years) is extremely excessive. Nobody was killed. So far as I know, nobody was subjected to being beaten. I understand that the City of Detroit went through a very difficult time when Mr. Kilpatrick was flaunting his nose at everybody. However, there is hope for Mr. Kilpatrick to make amends to his community and rehabilitate himself. Nowhere have I read or heard of rehabilitation potential being considered by Judge Edmunds when she crafted the sentence. A 15-year sentence at 85% would have been more than sufficient to deter recidivism. For this reason, although I have great respect for Judge Edmunds, I scored her as I did.

Send e-mail to this poster 10/11/2013 2:25:24 PM

Other

Comment #: 19863
Rating:8.0
Comments:
I have never met or been in court with Judge Edmunds, but I believe she is doing a great service to the city of Detroit by keeping Mr. Kilpatrick where he belongs!!!

Send e-mail to this poster 3/27/2013 1:20:59 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 18146
Rating:1.0
Comments:
A useless appendage of the "Justice System". Edmunds is a tool of the Obama / Holder/ Union Controlled Cabal that seeks to establish total government control over everyone. Her upholding of what has been demonstrated to be an illegal act of union "formation" should result in her removal from the bench and disbarment.

Send e-mail to this poster 6/21/2012 3:45:48 PM

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: 18144
Rating:1.0
Comments:
One of the worst judges ever. Judge Nancy G. Edmunds of the U.S. District Court of Eastern Michigan handed down the order after a brief hearing in Detroit. The gist of Edmunds' ruling was that because Michigan's Employment Relations Commission recognized the forced unionization of tens of thousands of so-called home health care workers in 2005, the state is on the hook for fulfilling the contract obligations with the union.

In making her decision, Edmunds chose to ignore several elements. Among these is the established fact that the alleged employer in the case, the Michigan Quality Community Care Council (MQC3) no longer claims to be the employer and the fact that (since being defunded by the legislature) the MQC3 has had only a single employee who works out of her house in Okemos for three hours or less a month so she can continue to collect unemployment benefits.

Additionally, according to documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, the union has given the MQC3 at least $12,000 to keep it afloat. Whether those who were unionized were ever eligible to even be considered as public employees in the first place also is an unanswered question.

Send e-mail to this poster 6/21/2012 6:38:54 AM

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 17303
Rating:9.6
Comments:
She is an amazing judge. She would do superior as the next justices of the Supreme Court.

Send e-mail to this poster 5/10/2012 10:01:09 PM

Other

Comment #: 17302
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Judge Nancy Edmonds is perhaps one of last of great thinkers and brilliant scholars known in the American Drug War prosecutions and drug conspiracy cases filed in the Eastern District of Michigan. She is someone who trust that the guarantees of the constitution would be observed in her courtroom regardless of race, creed, or gender. I have admied her decisions and ruling for more than a decade. She is a faithful advocate of humanitarian liberties. She is the only judge in the United States that disagreed with Congress October 15, 1995 decision to deny the U.S.Sentencing Commission amendment to reduce the cocaine to crack 100 :1 ratio 1:1, and impose a sentence based on the Commission rejected report and recommendation to Congress. By far a standup judge far different from the political judges appointed today. She is a realist.

Send e-mail to this poster 5/10/2012 9:56:31 PM

Other

Comment #: 13738
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Though I've never been in the courtroom with her, I can say that this Nancy Edmunds is a [Redacted by Ed.] She abused her authority in the underwear bomber case by censoring the victim statement of a witness who knows the underwear bomber was a US government setup, and she acted like she didn't think it was a setup when the fact that the bomber took a plea deal of life in prison without parole proves that it obviously was a setup (NOBODY takes a plea deal of life in prison without parole.) Clearly this judge thinks its ok for the government to fake terrorists attacks to justify taking away people's rights, and that's why she deserves [Redacted by Ed.] Oh, and kudos to [redacted by ] for making it obvious to the world that the underwear bomber was a U.S. government setup!

Send e-mail to this poster 3/12/2012 5:56:44 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 13042
Rating:3.0
Comments:
Unabashedly biased in favor of defendants in civil matters, and unusually hostile toward plaintiff-individuals in matters such as civil rights, employment law, and personal injury. Very poor judicial temperment. Very dogmatic. Has an agenda, and does not even attempt to hide her efforts to push it. Unaccommodating and discourteous to lawyers.

Send e-mail to this poster 10/26/2011 11:25:16 AM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 12919
Rating:9.8
Comments:
Judge Edmunds is smart, well prepared and fair. She is an excellent trial judge.

Send e-mail to this poster 9/21/2011 1:35:15 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 12542
Rating:1.6
Comments:
Judge Edmunds will do darn near anything to get rid of a case despite the merits. This includes ignoring genuine issues of material fact which she resolves in a way that unfairly prejudices consumers but shortens her docket.

Send e-mail to this poster 7/9/2011 2:46:06 PM

Litigant

Comment #: 12476
Rating:3.0
Comments:
I am a litigant with legal experience and filed numerous civil actions since 1995, Judge Nancy G. Edmunds,have prejudiced the rights on non attorneys civil cases, even my first civil case I filed in 1995, she was bias and prejudices toward me a non attorney. Her ruling is unfair towards any and all non attorneys litigants that been adjudicated before her, especially if they're prisoners. Evidence support my findingS.

Send e-mail to this poster 6/16/2011 12:43:23 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 9923
Rating:1.0
Comments:
If she is ruling your case, don't expect a fair ruling based on the acceptable logic or law. She seems to believe she is right anyway, and you don't dare question about my ruling. She may harass you without reason using nitpicking.

Send e-mail to this poster 3/13/2010 11:14:00 PM

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: 9761
Rating:3.2
Comments:
She is hard working, but what direction? She is busy to keep her position. She doesn't listen fairly to either party because she is focusing on not the parties or fair procedure, but herself and pushes her own formed decision through without change. Not patient, and her rulings tend to be illogical, but who can argue with a judge?

Send e-mail to this poster 1/29/2010 12:40:15 PM

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: 8324
Rating:8.5
Comments:
Judge Edmunds is an extremely bright, industrious judge. Her opinions are detailed, well-researched, and well-reasoned. On the other hand, arguing motions before her is essentially a waste of time. She always has her mind made up before taking the bench, and spends most of the argument looking at the clock on the wall -- highly disconcerting. She can be short-tempered if she thinks you are wasting her time, which is often.

Send e-mail to this poster 3/4/2009 3:17:02 PM