Hon. Michael P. Candela See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Butte County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   5.3 - 2 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 2 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

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:

  

What others have said about Hon. Michael P. Candela


Comments


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA53785
Rating:9.3
Comments:
* Hon. Candela has been respectful and detailed with all proceedings involving the case at hand.
* Hon. Candela has shown true care
Trust Hon. Candela's judgment

Litigant

Comment #: CA53670
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Denied temporary restraining order on lack of sufficient evidence .. a month later ruled permanent restraining order granted on same evidence ..
a month before ruled in fathers favor granted him sole legal physical custody father has had children five years in his county no proof of domestic violence .granted mother full custody mother is also in. Contempt of court this judge was confused when questioned why

Litigant

Comment #: CA46688
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
I have been ignored and ridiculed by this judge. He ignores orders and does what he wants and is in fair to those without a lawyer.

Litigant

Comment #: CA40092
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judicial sophistication and grasp of law against pro se competence defaults to severe rules of court forgetfulness, while fee waivers are Kryptonite to mindful case assignment.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA15349
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Excellent judge when defending against pro per litigants. He defers to counsel and will summarily reject self-represented litigants’ arguments. Makes being an attorney easy.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11824
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
lacks judicial temperament in the very few dealing I have had.

Litigant

Comment #: CA11540
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Does not want to hear both sides, anti constitutional. On the take.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA4360
Rating:1.3
Comments:
We 170.6 in every criminal case!