"The Robing Room: CA State Judges

Hon. Stephanie Sato	See Rating Details
Commissioner Superior Court
Alameda County	See Comments

Attorney Average Rating: 1.2 - 2 rating(s) Non-Attorney Average Rating: - 0 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. Stephanie Sato

Comments

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA56223
Rating:1.2

Comments:
Very poor judge with bad demeanors. Always complaints about how she has to read documents and she doesn’t want to read them. Always threatens to sanction and in fact sanction litigants for writing too much. Scold litigants for submitting briefs. Don’t be a judge if you don’t want to read. She acts like she is the God. She should not be a judge. Too mean and doesn’t follow the law.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA56222
Rating:1.2

Litigant

Comment #: CA55072
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
An [Redacted by Ed.] judge with poor Comprehension of Family Code. She will go out of her way to deny access to a Mandatory attorney’s fees for less well off parties. She is [Redacted by Ed.]unfair and fails to follow basic rules of the court. Seems to believe that she can deny people all their rights, while supporting abusers. She chums around with lawyers and is far too interested in lawyers getting access to money they have not earned.

This judge granted $50,000 in legal fees to a lawyer who was only retained for four months, and only was in court for a total of two days. She agreed to the disposal of community property massively under value, permitted one party to embezzle $100,000s and continued to hear a case when she was disqualified from doing so. You would be hard pressed to find a more [Redacted by Ed.] judge.

Fundamentally, she is another dangerous family court judge in a County where they appear to pride themselves in violating basic rights, and depriving people of their own property. The only thing to do is to continue to complain and expose the abuse of process in the family Courts in California.