Comment #: 34192
Rating:1.7
Comments:
Judge Leighton is a totally biased judicial pig. He formulated an opinion, took sides, coddled the plaintiff (an attorney) and displayed feats of creative judicial ingenuity like a legal twister-game in order to punish one side. I was informed by my paid council, after the first meeting, that Judge Leighton formally "Hated me", as did my council, Susan Ford, (Over $45,000. in fees) who worked hand-in-hand with the defense and the Jude to punish me. It has never been bigger SHAM court than this unfounded case. Defendant maid erroneous claims to and about police that when counter-manded by documentation, were ignored. This was a case of a Tacoma Judge helping a Tacoma attorney and failing to remain the least bit objective and ignoring major consequential fact. Only a judge so close to retirement would dare demonstrate such blatant bias and pre-judgment.
The level of deception perpetuated on the Judge by the defendant is monumental lying about former arrests, lude acts, literally filing false police reports, etc..
And now the sham judgment is affecting my credit. Looks like I'll sell some videos.

Comment #: 23612
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Leighton was reversed on appeal for abuses of discretion. An "abuse of discretion" is a euphemism for violation of federal law. In this case Leighton violated 28 USC 1441(c)(2) by "dismissing for lack of jurisdiction" rather than "remanding" the state law claims. The appellate court viewed this as an abuse of discretion where Leighton took jurisdiction of the state law claims and remanded the case. Upon remand, Leighton remained on the case. A motion was filed to disqualify Leighton, under 28 USC 455(a) and (b), for clearly violating federal law and thereby violating Leighton's obligations as a dues-paying member of the Washington State Bar, RCW 2.48.210. Leighton presided over the very motion that concerned Leighton's violations of these laws -- another violation of 28 USC 455, and also 28 USC 2072(b). The latter statute prohibits judges from using court rules to circumvent substantive rights -- here Leighton is using his court rule power to enlarge his own authority so as to decided his own conduct with respect to the laws that apply to him. Leighton refused to disqualify and subsequently dismissed the case yet again on jurisdictional grounds. The case is back with the US 9th Circuit, #15-35945.

Comment #: 23607
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Refused to disqualify himself on two cases where he had a clear conflict of interest. Does does not follow precedent or case law.

Comment #: 11668
Rating:10.0
Comments:
If every judge was as smart, fair, prompt in issuing rulings as Judge Leighton, our system of justice would actually work.