"The Robing Room: AK State Judges

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. Michael P. McConahy

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: AK81
Rating:2.8

Comments:
Lazy. Doesn't take the time to read what his clerk(s) write. When council filed motions to requesting clarification of his orders (which were very poorly written by his clerk(s)), he refuses to clarify and allows the order to stand as written.

Other

Comment #: AK17
Rating:2.0

Comments:
Judge McConahy does not take family legal matters seriously; it's either that or he is completely clueless when it comes to domestic violence. He does not follow State statutes during custody hearings. Judges are required to review each factor under AS 25.24.150(c); not doing so goes against a statute that was meant to protect children. Judge McConahy should not be able to make the kind of uneducated decisions that judges have the power to make without a proper understanding of domestic violence and how it affects children. In his mind, if the Office of Children's Services have not removed a child from their home, there must not be a problem. For many children, this could not be further from the truth.