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

Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 2 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 4 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 #: 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.