"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Michelle Tong	See Rating Details
Judge Superior Court
San Francisco County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 5.5 - 9 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: 2.0 - 9 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. Michelle Tong

Comments

Litigant

Comment #: CA54453
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Wholly lacking in judicial demeanor. Rude, impatient and ignorant. Train wreck. Ignores the evidence and goes her own way ... the wrong way. Stay away if possible.

Litigant

Comment #: CA54321
Rating:1.0

Comments:
received an unfair small claims decision from Judge Tong during the height of COVID-19. In San Francisco, it seems you can hire a contractor for substantial remodeling work, approve all the work, then demand the contractor leave just days from 100% completion without making final payment. Then, you can sue the contractor for an absurd amount, just under $10,000, needed to pay another contractor to finish the project. This happened to me.

Due to the pandemic, my court case was scheduled for the first day the courts reopened months later, on March 21. I misread the court time, assuming “9” meant 9 am, but it was actually 9 pm. After working all day, I returned to court in the evening. Everything was delayed, the waiting area was packed with some unmasked people, and the clerk was rude. I waited for hours, exhausted, and at around 11 pm, I struggled to stay awake. The clerk snapped at me to wake up, but there was still no timeframe for entering the courtroom. Needing to use the bathroom, I found a bench in another hallway and fell asleep. I missed my midnight court call, and the other party was awarded $10,000.

I attempted to appeal, but was told an appeal only reexamines submitted evidence. Since I wasn’t present for the original hearing (despite being checked in), I couldn’t submit new evidence or get a new court date. When I finally appeared before Judge Tong, she denied my exemption requests every time the other party drained my Wells Fargo account to zero balance. Judge Tong was rude, dismissive, and generally hostile. I now realize how stacked the deck was against me and regret not seeking representation, though everyone said, “there are no lawyers in small claims court!”

When the Contractors State License Board (CSLB) reopened after COVID-19, they issued my contractor’s license from my previously submitted application. It was promptly revoked because I now owed $12,000 with interest on this civil judgment.

I also felt prejudice from Judge Tong during my interactions in court. She seemed to cater to others while the clerk inexplicably acted sullenly towards me. The scam lawsuit and subsequent experience in Judge Tong’s court felt vindictive and wrong.

I’m relieved to see Judge Tong is finally receiving attention for her poor judgments. I feel for anyone whose lives were damaged by her ill-measured decisions and lack of humanity.

Litigant

Comment #: CA54293
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Even I was surprised by how poorly Judge Tong treated my ex-wife. She took everything I asserted as the absolute truth and treated my ex like a pathological liar. It was very strange, almost surreal to see such sexist behavior. BTW - if Judge Tong ever reads this - thank you, but my ex was actually telling the truth and had a lot of evidence that you didn't seem to actually read. You acted like my personal defense lawyer, much appreciated!!

Litigant

Comment #: CA54043
Rating:1.0

Comments:
She is below mediocre, she's abysmal. She did not read the numerous factual and legal documentation I provided to show cause and need to received substantial child and spousal support for myself as 100% caregiver our son who is Severely autistic, non-verbal and prone to request seizures. Despite the Highly regarded, multi-x published expert on autism, our Pediatric Neurologist who is an assistant professor a UCSF Marc Benioff hospital, wrote her prognosis on our son's condition + school IEP + various autistic related therapy reports -- she ignored all of it and instead relied on my spouse's court filing of his income which is untrue and he didn't file any back-up documentation. He just wrote a dollar $ without substantial evidence. She just gave power to my soon to be ex-husband despite his own admission that he fathered children outside of our marriage and supporting $12k per month + he is supporting his girlfriends with brand new expensive SUV and paying off an ex-girlfriend's $75k rent along and finally admitting that he tendered over one of his illegitimate child from another woman to me for 100% care and only offering $1k per month for her upkeep. This child who was conceived during our marriage, landed on my front door when she was 9 yrs. old. I took her in out of the goodness of my heart because she was technically an orphan after her biological mother suffered psychotic breakdown and unable to care for her and her biological father (my husband) did not know what to do with her. I had to use my own money to support this poor child who is now 14 yrs. old. I have been taking care of her for 4.5 yrs. without any financial support from my husband and her biological father. This judge is awful and a disgrace to working mothers fighting for their children. She need to not be involved in anything pertaining to family law. She should be sent to preside on cases in the small claims court, where small matters are decided. Anything pertaining to a disabled child's welfare and abandoned children's welfare by deadbeat fathers who makes a lot money - is beyond her scope of understanding and sympathy.

Litigant

Comment #: CA53930
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Unprofessional and can be very degrading to people who come in front of her. I have seen her act in an unprofessional manner on multiple occasions with different parties. Does not do her work thoroughly. That is the major issue. She is defensive as she still does not know what she is doing so she becomes aggressive, especially with unrepresentated parties. She is a bully - full stop. She does not read the material. I have found multiple errors in her work. Writing and conveying opinions and articulating the law is her job and her work product is sloppy from what I have seen and she renegs on what she has said in previous hearings. A disappointment.

Litigant

Comment #: CA53643
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Tong is not qualified to be a family court judge. She did not know what occupational therapy was, was not familiar with IEPs, minimum standards for parenting (she does not have kids). She either does not know or choose to follow the law relevant to my case. Multiple hearings and still no testimony taken. Submitting evidence to support my statements seems to have been perceived as my being a difficult co-parent, while giving my ex complete benefit of the doubt with zero evidence to support his statements which grossly misrepresent his parenting. Truly devastating to have my children's future rest in her hands. She has a generally rude temperament, can be snarky, and seems to enjoy "winging it" in terms of process in the courtroom, which has cost me a fortune as our preparations for court don't end up matching how she uses the time in court. The attorneys generally feel a need to defer to her as the judge, but that really only makes sense when a judge is following the law, being thoughtful etc.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA53280
Rating:9.8

Comments:
Judge Tong is smart, super-prepared and courteous to both sides. In more than 25 years of practicing law, she is one of the top 10 judges I have personally seen.

Litigant

Comment #: CA53243
Rating:2.0

Comments:
Biased, rude and clearly does not understand family law. I can not believe she is making decisions about the safety and well being of children. It is so scary. I truly wish action could be taken.

Litigant

Comment #: CA53202
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Judge Tong is the worst I have appeared before. Simply put, she is unprofessional in her demeanor. Her work product is full of errors and she does not read her cases or understand them fully. She is lazy.
She does not know what she is doing. This is extremely clear. As such, she becomes defensive in the courtroom. I have witnessed her attack and silence people. She is not objective and has clear biases against certain races. It is a true shame that she is on the bench. She is not qualified.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA52512
Rating:1.9

Comments:
Does not know the law. She does not read the fillings. She is a bully when she does not know the law. Very poor judge as she does not read the filings. I have sat through 10 hours of watching her preside over multiple cases. She should NOT have been elected. She is not professional and does not do the work. Poor, poor judge - nowhere near as good as Darwin, Flores or Hwang.

Litigant

Comment #: CA48845
Rating:10.0

Comments:
She's good, smart, but don't get on her bad side, I'm glad someone with half of a brain is assigned to the SF Family Court

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA47586
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Update: Her demeanor is now slowly moving into the acceptable category, but she has another deficit that should be gone by now - she lets pro pers go on indefinitely on irrelevant or marginal side issues.

When handling a harassment or similar case, the experienced judicial officer will ask the pro pers open ended questions to see if they have a winning case or a defense as soon as it becomes clear that they want to have a long time to unfurl all their grievances.

This is especially so when interpreters are in use.

Get to the point and see if there is or is not a basis to find for the Petitioner. Yes, venting is important, but court is not psychiatry. Get to the point.

I am going to ask each of you some questions today.

For purposes of my questions, Violence means xxxx

Mr. Smith, did Ms. Jones ever use violence against you?

Mr. Smith, did Ms. Jones ever threaten you with violence?

Did she threaten violence with words or gestures?

etc.

In a few words, is there anything else you would like me to know?

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA47185
Rating:10.0

Comments:
A judge for the people. Actually reads the court documents and calls insurance companies out on deceptive practices. Fair, smart, and thorough.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA46508
Rating:2.0

Comments:
Horrible judge. Stupid beyond belief. Does not believe prejudgment interest is recoverable on undisputed and liquidated debt and refuses to acknowledge overwhelming statutory and case law directly on point simply because she is a left winger and former "eviction defender" and "public defender".

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA46364
Rating:3.4

Comments:
It is unusual for a newly appointed judge to be confused, defensive, rude and snappish, not to mention a tad closed-minded. She gives off fumes indicating that the ro calendar is beneath her dignity. She needs some work on her judicial temperament. The pro pers and their witnesses are not opponents. She is not uniformly rude, but she is far too rude at this early stage in her career. I would be interested to know if she treats clerks and staff well.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA41843
Rating:1.0

Comments:
Completely lacking in judicial demeanor, brings a serious attitude and bias to the bench. Rude. Total moron. This person is completely unqualified to be a judge. Stay away at all cost. Should be banished if that were possible. Challenge. Challenge. Challenge.

Litigant

Comment #: CA41698
Rating:1.0

Comments:
She's lazy, biased, moody, does not want to look at the points and authority and most importantly not fair. She is not qualified to be a judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA40163
Rating:1.8

Comments:
She’s very rude and has an age full temperament. Why is it necessary to yell and be rude to litigants? She was even rude and condescending to her clerk in front of all the litigants. Very unpleasant vibe on her courtroom.

Use a 170.6 oral motion to challenge her for small claims. It’s a free one time pass to get another judge. Avoid her at all costs

Litigant

Comment #: CA38326
Rating:1.0

Comments:
absolute moron. doesn't understand how banking works. i was sued for 800 dollars principal and 9500 in pain and suffering and this idiot awarded 5 grand principal. perhaps she needs to retake 3rd grade math.