"The Robing Room: CA 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. Gerrit W. Wood

Comments

Other

Comment #: CA7701
Rating:2.0

Comments:
Horrible judge with proceedings. Admitted in open court he didn't know what to do and relied on other side's attorney for advice. Horrible.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA7160
Rating:9.9

Comments:
Judge Wood is a great judge. Fair to a fault, smart, respectful of attorneys who follow the rules, and just an overall terrific judicial officer. He is a model for what a trial judge should be.

That is not to say he does not lose his temper at times. Usually, it is when attorneys insist on breaking procedural rules over and over and over. He is a stickler for the rules of procedure and evidence, but in a good way. He runs trials extremely efficiently.

In argument, he listens to both sides, asks questions that demonstrates he read and considered the papers, and his rulings are fair. He issues detailed opinions that are well reasoned, heavy on citations to case law, and are tough to find fault with, even when they go against you. If he rules against you, you were probably wrong.

The only fault I can find is that he tries to settle cases that are sent to him before trying them. That seems like a bit of an ethical grey area to me. A trial judge shouldn't be talking to the parties about settlement positions. But other than that, this is a great judge. I wish I could try all of my cases in front of him.