Comment #: MD9635
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Before beginning, I don’t know how many views this website receives but hopefully the following is helpful to the public.

MD law states a judge must retire at age 70. Megan Johnson, born in October 1972, is 72 1/2years old. How is she still serving on the bench? I strongly believe there was foul play with a last minute switch from one judge to Megan Johnson with 2-3 days before my trial. Judge Johnson arrived 28 minutes late to court. Trials began at 8:45, she entered the room at 9:13 and court staff had to call down and ask for her and find out what was going on.

Ms. Johnson displays an incredible amount of unbridled bias but apparently not much intellect about the law and/or her duties as judge. She made menacing glares at both myself and my witness, even when we were seated in the gallery waiting for preliminaries to go first. She never allowed me to present my bevy of evidence, rather she had me sticker it and the bailiff hastily took it minutes before ruling in favor of defense counsel with no reason why. She also stated, “There appears one some angst between plaintiff and defense” in her ruling despite no evidence, verbal or nonverbal, in the case record shown by me toward the defense or defense counsel. She never asked defense counsel to explain his objections. It was like a contest to see who could say “objection” the most with no decision(s) made by her. Johnson was apparently dazed and confused the entirety of the brief trial, ratcheting her head left and right numerous times. She spoke very little, procedurally or otherwise. Once, she sustained my objection but defense counsel continued to badger my witness with the same questioning that she already answered so she does not enforce any decisions she makes during trial!! She afforded my case approximately 26 minutes, despite only one other case in the room to be litigated after I left. I requested 2 hours of time in writing in response to district court’s request of how much time I sought. Defense counsel requested 1 hour, so I guess this is how Judge Johnson compromises? ?????

If you appear before Judge Johnson (and apparently she gets to serve for life when she should have stepped down almost 3 years ago) you best have an attorney, regardless of the dollar amount of your civil matter or how dead to rights wrong the other side may be. She will afford you no time, interrupt and prevent you from asking questions to your witness or adversary, and make hasty, summary decisions without weighing, looking, or questioning evidence. She will also not do her due diligence either as a steward of the court. She took personal property that was part of my evidence and made a ridiculous comment, “I’ll look at this later, but I’m entering a decision now, judgment in favor of the defense”. Hopefully, I will get it back sometime soon.

I filed a motion for a new trial - 2 pages of well-written reasons. She likely never read it at all. Why have a judge make a decision on his/her own rulings? That makes about as much sense as the fox being allowed to guard the chicken coop. I’d love to find a job where I can be my own supervisor but I’d likely have to move to fantasy island. So much for “fair, efficient, and effective justice in the MD Judiciary.

Comment #: MD8574
Rating:9.8
Comments:
Pleasant to be in front of. Moves things along. Although very fair, she does not waste time when the law is clearly in your favor.

Comment #: MD6773
Rating:4.4
Comments:
After a dozen cases before her (some wins and some losses), I believe that she is useless as a judge in civil litigation. She never allows facts or law to interfere with who she thinks should win. She has no concept of the meaning of her oath of office.

Comment #: MD6201
Rating:4.8
Comments:
Also ready to resolve a small claim against the defendant. A female litigant always has a very good chance of winning.

Comment #: MD4967
Rating:10.0
Comments:
Very fair judge in applying "reasonable doubt" standards! Knows her stuff!

Comment #: MD2305
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Yes, she is fair sometimes, but I think that she made her decision a few days before the hearing. She acts like she doesn't want to hear anything.

Comment #: MD1958
Rating:9.7
Comments:
Reasonable and fair, but definitely no-nonsense. The decision that she renders may be a decision that you don't like, but it will be fair.