Hon. Susan M. Gill See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Kern County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.2 - 14 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 6 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


Please type what you see below:

    

What others have said about Hon. Susan M. Gill


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA30013
Rating:10.0
Comments:
The most kind judge on the bench. She always listens to both sides and is the most patient.

Other

Comment #: CA29350
Rating:1.0
Comments:
“[I] am too old to understand this evidence.” Presiding Judge Susan Gill after she had already made a ruling and when presented with evidence of a technical nature at a reconsideration hearing which completely refuted her original ruling, this was her comment.

Question- if you cannot understand the evidence, how do you manage to make a ruling in the first place? Your first ruling devestated an entire family and was adverse to ALL evidence available.

Litigant

Comment #: CA29106
Rating:1.0
Comments:
As per the reviews below, Gill lied in her ruling about orders she’d made which were available on public record (why?). How the hell she got through this case without admonishment is one for the ages.

She flat out lied on record, ruled exclusively on hearsay, ruled to favor a retiring atttorney at the detriment of a minor child.

Susan, you should’ve taken the job with kern county bar association. You are a dud judge.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA27731
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Came here to leave a negative review but have seemingly been beaten to the punch! Court clerk type ability and temperament at best. Reckless & dangerous at worse. If she appoints Childers as minors, get your noose out. No amount of evidence will break that bond. Dog & leash scenario and Gill isn’t holding the leash.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA27730
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Just get your case moved elsewhere or be prepared and expense for a reconsideration or appeal. HEARSAY IS NOT EVIDENCE!

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA27176
Rating:1.0
Comments:
If you’d like a ruling from a dementia ridden imbecile, get your case in front of Gill.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA27142
Rating:3.3
Comments:
Judge Gill had the option of picking between 2 parents to award custody.

The father was a multiple felon with charges and convictions for attempted murder, gang related activity, convictions against minors, drug convictions, alcohol convictions, and a civil ruling for defrauding the state of California out of unemployment benefits. This man also allowed both children to perform actual tattoos on grown adults in an illegal tattoo parlor at the age of 6.

The mother had no convictions or charges for anything and both the minor children were straight A students. The minor girls home life was stable and generally happy.

“Judge” Gill ruled that the children be put with the father even though he was living with a woman who was facing domestic violence charge and his work hours meant that the children couldn’t get to school on their own. She placed no weight on the fact that the children had been bought up by the mother since both their births. Both children were traumatized by Gills batshit bonkers ruling.

This woman is plain nuts.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26755
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Not traveling again to argue in front of this judge. You’re better off appealing. She doesn’t consider evidence and is open to inputting hearsay.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26711
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Gill appointed court experts to give evidence in our case at trial. She charged us a lot of money for these experts. On the day of the trial, the experts hadn’t finished their investigation so we requested a continuance. Gill denied the continuance and ruled against us. We finally had the court appointed expert complete his job and he vindicated me of Gills accusations. We presented this evidence at a reconsideration and Gill refused to overturn her judgement. In her original judgement, she lied about ever appointing an expert even though I have the court ruling in hand.

She’s disgusting and a liar. I’m not saying that lightly. We have written evidence.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26599
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Judge Gills ruling gave no weight to it’s traumatic impact on 2 minors. For a judge that masqueraded in nomination under the guise of being a mental health advocate, her rulings are obscene. Led by the nose consistently by the obscenely incompetent minors counsel, Stephanie Childers, lord knows how this “judge” continues in office.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26577
Rating:1.0
Comments:
A book will be released in 2020 on Judge Gill coercing with a retiring attorney in order to pervert the course of justice. Carl Hart... It’s on its way Susan and when it hits public domain, you’re done.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26336
Rating:4.0
Comments:
Appears as well spoken with a great grasp of the law initially but then the decisions start...

Honestly, the weirdest courtroom I’ve had to attend. Kern County is an unusual place. I’ve viewed the reviews below about Judge Gills conduct and absolutely concur. I have a colleague from SLO who was involved in the case where Gill gifted a retiring attorney a trial hearing at the detriment of 2 minor children. She literally removed 2 minor straight A girls from their law abiding and parental superstar mother to put them into an illegal tattoo parlor with a multiple felon white supremacist father and his partner who was facing domestic violence charges, for absolutely no valid legal reason EXCEPT it was the fathers attorneys last case prior to retirement. How about that for a retirement present?!?!?

She’s undeserving of her position. Sorry to say it but Kern County Court is a joke.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA26121
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I spotted multiple legal errors that Judge Gill made during our case and I’m a plumber.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA25815
Rating:3.3
Comments:
This Judge ruled in favor of her colleague. There’s absolutely no other explanation for her ruling. We had a 100% lock up with written confessions, photographic evidence, testimony, and she still ruled against us. Obscene Judgement. Needs investigation.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA25487
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Displays a temperament and level of civility unbecoming of a judge. Really disappointing for Kern County. Possibly may have made a decent attorney at some point but localism has been kind to Gill.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA25330
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Gill made so many legal errors throughout our case that I would be unable to list everything in this short comments section.

Biased, dismissed critical evidence, unreasonable, admits hearsay, and is unconcerned how her poor judgement and reckless behavior will be received by the public. A learned and experienced attorney would have more luck trying to explain current affairs to a 6 year old.

Court Staff

Comment #: CA25296
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
A fine example of what goes on in Kern County, stays in Kern County. Evidence is irrelevant with this one.

Litigant

Comment #: CA25295
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Ruled entirely on here say, Ignored evidence, Prejudged the case, and made unsubstantiated assumptions. This Judge is reckless and unqualified for her position. I was stunned by some of her accusations and interpretations.

Other

Comment #: CA25102
Rating:2.0
Comments:
Witnessed Gill take nearly 7 months to appoint a 730 evaluator, charge both parties for his services, allowed respondents attorney to attend mediation, denied the petitioner the right to continuance till 730’s report was available, held trial, ruled against petitioner based entirely on hearsay, denied in her ruling ever appointing a 730 evaluator, removed 2 minor girls from mother for “planting evidence” of a digital nature, placed 2 minor children in fathers illegal tattoo parlor, ignored fathers criminal history (drugs, alcohol, attempted murder, hate crimes, intimidation for race/color/religion, gang activity, dui, and 272pc), allowed a reconsideration because she figured out she did appoint a 730 evaluator, 730’s report vindicates petitioner, Gill states verbatim court “I’m too old to understand his evidence,” refused to overturn decision, sends both parties back to mediate.
I’ve given her a score of 1 because she was polite and punctual as she shredded confidence in the court.

Other

Comment #: CA23806
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Susan Gill is not a good judge.i went to court to get my kids from their mother who was living with a child moslester and while my kids where living with the mother the boyfriend raped his 13 year old niece took the mother to court with evidence, documents and even a witness that took the stand to testify she still gave the mother full custody knowing she fail 2 drug test with nowhere to go no job to support my kids and she still gave the mother full custody with no kind of evidence all hearsay and talk. I have a stable job house for them to live in and everything to take care of my kids and she put them on the streets with their mother was a drug addict and having my kids at risk around a child molester with my daughter that is 10 years old if that man can rapist 13 year old niece who is blood he will do it to anyone I will not stop going to court Intel I get my kids away from their mother and that monster she lives with is currently now incarcerated in jail with current charges of raping a 13 year old minor slamming drugs into her arm before raping her and other charges this is not the kind of Judge you want to be in a child custody court room

Other

Comment #: CA20295
Rating:1.0
Comments:
engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the court. off record she definitely catered and advised the opposing side made rulings without evidence.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA4238
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
This judge seems to be defense oriented, or possibly pro-government. I had two writ of mandate hearings in front of her on the same day. I felt like she went out of her way to find a way to rule for the government, and I don't say that lightly. I don't mind losing when I should, and I have a pretty good handle on whether I'm going to win or lose. Also, she wasn't very pleasant.