Comment #: 35026
Rating:2.0
Comments:
She is now a judge. Be careful. She is not a fair nor an open mind judge. She picks her favorite side and will do whatever it takes to make sure that side wins. She is very biased and unreasonable. She thinks she knows it all and refuses to allow proper arguments, objections or records to be made. She is not a fair judge. She gets entangled with her personal opinions, personal connections and personal beliefs to the issues. She goes out of her way to ignore precedent and laws that disfavor her strong and baseless opinions.

Comment #: 34604
Rating:2.7
Comments:
[Redacted] Allowed a fraudulent claim to be brought against my small startup by a $10 billion company in a completely different field when my company didn’t even have a product on the market or any revenue and claimed the giant corporation claimed trademark infringement and unfair competition. Of course we couldn’t afford legal counsel. She took their side and put the nail in the coffin saying we automatically defaulted to losing AND had to pay their legal fees for bringing a lawsuit against us because we couldn’t afford counsel and couldn’t defend ourselves, so we must have automatically been in the wrong. Had maybe $2000 in the bank when we were sued by this giant corporation and Judge Corley ruled we not only automatically lost (with no trial) but had to pay the giant corporation $56,000. Absolute [redacted by Ed.]in favor of giant corporations trying to destroy honest, small companies that are just trying to help improve the world for average people. Not a judge of the people.

Comment #: 34042
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
Horrific judge blatantly ignore the law.

Comment #: 24057
Rating:6.8
Comments:
She has no respect for a court of record and the tribunal being independent of the magistrate. Go with a non-magistrate judge. Do not consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction. I'm probably going to sue her in Jan 2017.

Comment #: 21276
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Federal Magistrate Judge Corley allowed the appointed Federal Attorney to base his entire 25+ year-old loan case and proceed with an incomplete and demonstratively highly questionable unauthenticated business record (normally not allowed in court as being the sole foundational evidence). Despite the fact that the defendant (who proceeded pro se for financial reasons) produced a Federal Inspector General's audit report which reflected numerous instances of blatant loan fraud (which any reasonable jury would have found compelling), Judge Corley directed the defendant to a reduced financial settlement. When you have a significantly documented defense, but cannot afford a trial, you are basically forced to settle. This judge had the plaintiff's attorney's motion held over our head in abeyance (like a thug would twist your arm until you cried "uncle"). Frankly speaking, the bottom line is, Judge Corley aided and abetted the opposition in order to bring their initially perpetrated fraud to its final fruition. "Oh wad power the giftee gee us, to see ourselves as others see us."