Hon. Perry Parker See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Sutter County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   1.8 - 3 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   2.0 - 3 rating(s)
Please send me alerts on this judge
E-mail Address:




Add your own rating

E-Mail Address (will not be displayed)
   
Confirm E-mail Address      
Zip
Occupation

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




What others have said about Hon. Perry Parker


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6175
Rating:1.0
Comments:
We recently had a motion hearing. He did not respond with an opinion until 10 weeks later, which means he did not remember what the attorneys said at the motion. His ruling was one-sided, did not consider the elements of the case, applicable State Law or Case Law. He simply quoted out of the papers from the one side.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA5296
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I'm a plaintiff's attorney. After a year of waiting, I finally got a CMC. I asked Judge Parker for a trial date ASAP, but the defense counsel asked for a new CMC, in three months, on the ground that he had not conducted any discovery. Judge Parker reamed out the defense counsel for awhile, and then abruptly set a new CMC for 22 months in the future. Not a trial date, a CMC: 22 months. I couldn't believe my ears, so I immediately (and politely) asked Judge Parker to repeat the date, and he angrily replied, "I can't remember."

To make matters worse, when we get the new CMC, the trial date will almost certainly have to be scheduled after the three-year discretionary dismissal period. While I was sitting and watching the call of the calendar, another case was near the three-year period. The defense counsel said he was not going to file a motion to dismiss for delay in prosecution, but the Judge badgered him, telling him that he really should. That's right: He told the defense counsel what dispositive motion to make, and he strongly, strongly implied he would grant the motion when it was presented.

It makes me wonder whether that is Judge Parker's plan for my lawsuit. And I don't have the slightest inkling what he has against me or my client.

Litigant

Comment #: CA2768
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Arrogant, makes threats. Thug with power.

Other

Comment #: CA2541
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge does not know the law or follow it. Rules on what he "believes." I thought it was a court room, not a church. Disgraceful.

Other

Comment #: CA2535
Rating:4.0
Comments:
Sat as a courtroom observer for a special project and saw Judge Parker flex his prejudice against Punjabi litigants more than once. Considering the demographic of his district, this is a bit concerning. Pretty obviously biased and intolerant. His hubris and "ivory tower" attitude was far from objective. A sad case of a man who is in need of retirement. Easily flustered and put off by everyone including his court staff.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA2517
Rating:3.4
Comments:
Vindictive person. If you disagree with him you will never see even justice from him