"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Socrates Peter Manoukian	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
Santa Clara County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 2.1 - 10 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 6.0 - 3 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. Socrates Peter Manoukian

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA54752
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
`Judge Manoukian is unfair and bias and has no regard for self-represented litigants. Two motion in limine's were filed prior to trial that would have disposed of the case prior to trial but Judge Manoukian did not rule on either motion. As the trial began Judge Manoukian disclosed a conflict of interest in that his wife serves on the 6th Appellate court of appeals. After hearing the conflict of interest I requested for Judge Manoukian to recuse himself which he ignored stating "that's why I don't like self-represented litigants". There was an actual conflict of interest since the previous case between the same litigants was appealed and his wife presided over the appeal. As the trial progressed Judge Manoukian incorrectly denied myself to present any evidence of the previous case citing law of the case. Law of the case only applies to the current case and not the underlying action so I should have been permitted to present evidence. Judge Manoukian did everything he could do to sabotage my case including ignoring testimony and not providing a court reporter. I had previously been granted a fee waiver and the California Supreme Court has ruled that litigants who have been granted fee waivers are guaranteed to have a court reporter at trial. [Redacted by Ed.]

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA46300
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Socrates is an OUTSTANDING jurist and judicial officer.

He is EPITOME of a judge with integrity.

He's a damn FINE judge. And, he neither takes crap, not wastes time, on unrepresented litigants.

Litigant

Comment #: CA42964
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Manoukian is a horrible judge and disregards relevant caselaw frequently. The precedent setting case in my complaint was decided in 2004 and the caselaw has remained undisturbed but Judge Manoukian ignored and indicated that it was not relevant. [Redcted] but he is horrible and his temperament is not good and [redacted] in his courtroom administration.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA39083
Rating:3.8

Comments:
Judge Manoukian used to be a better jurist. It appears that he has taken a down turn in his abilities to remain impartial and apply the law fairly. As most judges, he favors the big corporations over the citizen now. He used to be about 50-50, now he appears to be about 80% in favor of big business with must less regard for individual claimants or their counsel.

He sometimes will put on a show of being amicable with counsel; however, he does not evaluate what is in briefs, or at least his legal staff does not, and he does not appear to even brief himself on a case now. He simply shots from the hip so to speak.

Only if he finds a strong personal interest in a case will he understand its details, otherwise, he is out of the loop. A portion of this is due to his being burned out as a jurist of so many years, and another part is that the case load is too large for him. There is limited staff.

I wish he could return to the days as being erudite and even handed, but wishing is all we can do now. He should retire to not give the Bench in Santa Clara bad name.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA38587
Rating:1.3

Comments:
Extremely lazy, incompetent and biased judge. Presides over the cases in which he has a conflict of interests. Does not read the briefs. Very short tempered, frequent psychopathic outbursts, violent yelling in the courtroom. Reserve your 170.6 motion for him.

Other

Comment #: CA36929
Rating:8.0

Comments:
Excellent. Does not take bull from frivolous pro per litigants. Moves things along. Listens well.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA34786
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Lazy, reads nothing, loves to hear himself talk, unfair, biased, don’t get on his bad side, as arrogant as they come. Horrible judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA34785
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Lazy, reads nothing, loves to hear himself talk, unfair, biased, don’t get on his bad side, as arrogant as they come. Horrible judge.

Litigant

Comment #: CA32409
Rating:10.0

Comments:
Judge Manoukian is the best judge this court has ever had or perhaps will ever have.

Litigant

Comment #: CA32132
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Lesson learned: Do not “judge” a Judge by his online reputation.

Honorable Socrates Manoukian very positively did not live up to his degrading online persona. For this specific reason, I felt that I have a moral obligation to share what I witnessed of his Honor.

I had the opportunity to encounter Hon. Manoukian while he provided a very relevant, patience-driven teaching opportunity to the respective counsels on the case just prior to mine.

His delivery was unique.

He did not just cite case law; rather, he provided all counsels resources and genuine knowledge share (if they so choose to gain).

This is not to say that Hon. Socrates Manoukian does not demand a high standard of professionalism, timeliness, and mutual respect – however, he embodied that of a true giver of knowledge and that of a mentor – it was a keen reminder that those who teach are those who desire to grow, learn and share.

Be prepared, be timely, do not bicker, and treat others with respect and you will likely receive same from Hon. Manoukian.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA14092
Rating:1.0

Comments:
prejudiced, talks too much, racist, dislikes women, does not listen well, not fair to poor people, and lazy.

Litigant

Comment #: CA10254
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
If you publicly criticize judge Socrates Manoukian, he will send the Santa Clara County Sheriff department to your house and they will threaten to kill your family.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA7775
Rating:3.0

Comments:
Actually dumb.
Lazy, doesn't read motions, biased, don't get on his bad side.
Supposedly was an excellent insurance defense trial attorney. Extremely biased towards insurance defense.
That is why all he does is shuffle cases

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5010
Rating:1.7

Comments:
Does not read papers carefully. Does not read statutes carefully. Very arrogant and does not treat lawyers with respect.
Loves to hear himself talk. Admits to loving being stroked. Likes the center stage.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA3855
Rating:2.3

Comments:
Does not listen to both sides equally in a matter. He comes to court after reading a brief with a preconceived opinion of how he will rule on the issue at bar. He is generally in favor of the plaintiff, which hardly seems fair.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA357
Rating:4.7

Comments:
Does not seem to read papers very carefully. Hates counsel interrupting each other and anything ad hominem in briefing. Will not adjudicate "he said, she said" disputes. Stickler for deadlines. Even if you have a stipulation in writing, make sure you have time to bring your motion because he will not give you an extension no matter how good faith your reliance was.