Hon. Wilfred J. Schneider, Jr. See Rating Details
Superior Court
San Bernardino County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   2.3 - 9 rating(s)
Non-Attorney Average Rating:   - 0 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. Wilfred J. Schneider, Jr.


Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA13281
As others have said, one of the worst. It is very clear he, and/or his research attorney, does not read the briefs placed in front of him. Doesn't understand very basic tenants of law, and refuses to take the time to learn. If attorneys exhibited such lack of diligence and due care, they would find themselves in a malpractice suit or worse. He clearly hates to be in his own courtroom, and I question why he remains. Bitter and borderline incompetent, you'd get more evenhanded consideration from a New York sewer rat.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA12780
This judge was not only incredibly rude, but downright hostile. Not prepared at all. It was very obvious he did not read the briefs. My attorney said he was by far the worst she's ever encountered.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11222
The previous poster meant Commission on Judicial Performance. After observing numerous motions and matters before this judge, it appears he doesn't have a handle on his cases and isn't prepared. It's clear he doesn't read the briefs from the basic questions he does ask and probably relies on his research attorneys. His rulings on ex parte applications appear arbitrary and appear biased in favor of male attorneys. That is clear, but also clearly biased im favor of plaintiffs. He drags litigation out for no good reason other than his argument of what's the harm not understanding that attorneys fees and costs are being incurred by the parties. He's pretty sarcastic and hostile towards female attorneys but I have seen him hostile towards male attorneys too, just not nearly as often. I don't know where they get these judges. So the Commission on Judicial Performance is where you have to complain. Our firm is considering filing a complaint but we know to paper him next time around.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11221
Really incompetent judge who clearly favors male attorneys. He jokes with them and has ruled in their favor on every motion that I have witnessed while sitting in his courtroom. He either ignores the arguments or shows blatant disrespect towards female attorneys. He doesn't understand the code of civil procedure, doesn't read the briefs, doesn't understand basic civil standards of review,and clearly relies on research attorneys and his court clerk for their opinion. He is as incompetent as they come but what's worse is that he doesn't care to prepare himself. Someone should report him to the Commission of Judicial Review.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11156
After reading others' comments I now know why 1) he would not issue an opinion in open court but sent it out the same day (his law clerk was writing it) and 2) his warm treatment of the man on the other side while cool treatment of me, a woman (sexist and biased).

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA11154
He had just come from Juvy and I don't think he was up on civil law; he ruled against me and offered our crazy advocate to ask for more attorney fees, which assisted in throwing us into bankruptcy. I would paper him if assigned to him again.

Civil Litigation - Govt.

Comment #: CA11153
Sexist judge, makes it clear female attorneys are not welcomed in his courtroom, doesn't read the briefs, depends and authorizes his clerk to render opinions and practice law, not prepared on the bench and relies on tentatives prepared by research attorneys, specious reasoning, and subpar legal acumen. Incapable of handling complex legal issues or any legal issues outside basic car accident personal injury cases.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA8977
Hi. Only good things. We won our trial; which may give me rose colored glasses. He seemed fair. He could have been harsh to opposing counsel for many reasons. He remained even-keeled; without being overly friendly.

Criminal Defense Lawyer

Comment #: CA5285
He was bias from the start. He made sure I wasn't able to tell the truth about the case. He is the type of judge that shouldn't be on anyone bench. I will fight him and my sister for extorting money from me. I will bring attention to this situation.