Hon. Vanessa A. Zecher See Rating Details
Superior Court
Santa Clara County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   1.7 - 1 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   1.0 - 1 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      

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)

Please type what you see below:


What others have said about Hon. Vanessa A. Zecher


Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA19841
Rating:Not Rated
I am familiar with the agenda of the reviewer who suggested extramarital activities between Zecher and Rosen. I do not approve of personal attacks unrelated to judicial performance. I am in no way in agreement with that speaker. Let's keep polemics out of reviews.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA7035
Threatening letter from her attorney 2010 takes the position that a child support settlement for below guideline and without the waiver required by FC 4065 is legal and binding if it was signed in mediation by a judge pro tem! See Carlson v. Eassa (1997) if you doubt me; she is a judge now yet does not care about a law that bars a judge from acting absent the waiver? Also does not believe in free speech on this site?


Comment #: CA6139
I was threatened by Zecher's attorney for publishing comments she made to me in an email in 2003; now I have put Judge Johnson of Canon 3D (2). In 2003, Zecher knew I refused to waive guideline CS, let other attorney have a draft of settlement entered into an order after I revoked consent; fraud upon the court. Zecher refused to tell judge. In 2010, fifty judges including that judge endorsed her run for the judiciary. Her mom was a judge too. Political ambition above duty to client? That would be a violation of the Rules of Professional conduct, huh?


Comment #: CA4556
As a family law attorney, she wrote to me that many judges "were ill-tempered, ill-prepared, or just plain ill" and wouldn't go to court. She told me that the mandatory statement re: waiver of CS was "boiler plate," and let opposing council have a settlement entered into an order that lacked the FC 4065 mandatory waiver and violated the terms of a college trust fund, and then refused to file a set-aside motion when Judge Johnson entered it into an order. She had her attorney threaten me when I posted this information online. I cited the First Amendment and my possession of Judge Zecher's e-mail.