"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. Karin Schwartz

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA54590
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Schwartz is lack of Jury trial experience. She did not follow the correct Jury selection process and rejected my peremptory right. The later presiding juror was rejected by me. He told the Court and jurors twice that his good friend was a manager and lost his job due to his friend was sued by his subordinate. This presiding juror further said that he would not let this situation happened again. I excused him during the jury selection, but Judge Schwartz rejected and ignored my request.

Furthermore, Judge Schwartz's last minute special Jury verdict form had the defects. Jurors had questions before the verdict was submitted. I also questioned the accuracy based on VF-5001 of CACI. Judge Schwartz blamed me and stopped me while Jurors were in the verdict room.

My case was ruined for these reasons-
(1) Judge limited this complex case to a 12-hour trial.
(2) Judge only allowed very few witnesses to testify.
(3) Judge constantly changed her own orders and failed to follow them during the trials.
(4) Judge's biased and unfair discretion to allow the defendant (a big corporation)had so many privileges: motion in limine to remove many trial material facts, client-attorney privileges, no verified responses of POD documents, removed several cause of actions after defendant's motion for summary judgment, all special jury instruction, questionnaire and verdict form from defendant. Last minute's directed verdict from defendant to remove the key wrongful retaliation evidences. Judge Shwartz refused to let me ask witness questions. She only selected some of my questions and ordered me to let her review first.

Judge Schwartz is not qualified to sit there. SHe destroyed the justice system and my life.

Other

Comment #: CA54557
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Judge Schwartz is very biased. She favored the big corporation's defense attorneys. She had a handful of contradicted orders in my case. She refused to give the plaintiff time to talk at the hearings and trials. She rejected 85% of my witnesses to testify at the trial. Per defense attorney's request, she removed many of my admissible exhibits durind the trials.