Hon. James E. Herman See Rating Details
Judge
Superior Court
Santa Barbara County
See Comments

Attorney Average Rating:   4.2 - 2 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      
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. James E. Herman


Comments


Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA10734
Rating:3.0
Comments:
When my first case was assigned to Judge Herman and I found out he used to be the President of the California Bar Association (and very involved in the California Judicial Counsel), I was hopeful he would be a very thorough and well-reasoned jurist. I was sorely disappointed.

His rulings in civil cases appeared to reflect a deep misunderstanding of the law, and often entirely failed to address arguments made by the parties (without any explanation). It is one thing when a judge considers relevant facts and authority in making a ruling, but simply relies on other facts/authorities to reach their decision. It is entirely another matter when a ruling appears to be cut and paste from a party's brief, without even addressing arguments from the other side. Eventually we ended up just settling the case, rather than having to continue to litigate in his courtroom.

In one hearing before him he readily admitted that he had not even considered numerous briefed issues in his tentative ruling. He took the hearing under submission and promised to address them all in his final order. He then took a lengthy period of time to issue a final order which was identical to the tentative. My guess is this guy was overburdened with his extreme case load (which included ALL sorts of civil cases ranging from family law to complex lit), and he relied too heavily on his clerks to draft his rulings for him. It is unfortunate, because he came across as very intelligent and with a keen temperament during hearings before him.

Good luck, criminal attorneys of the world...he has been reassigned to handle all criminal cases moving forward. Looks like Judge Herman will be all yours soon.

Other

Comment #: CA8053
Rating:Not Rated
Comments:
seems to go along with people from santa barbara. Never be a out of town Lawyer. I don't think he even read the brief from our side.

Happy to be out of his court room

Other

Comment #: CA7556
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Can not understand how this judge made judgement based on a 9 year old's interview, and granted a non present parent of many years custody vs full time mom of nine years loosing at least amicable custody.

Civil Litigation - Private

Comment #: CA6962
Rating:5.3
Comments:
Better understand that no one is more important, or is brighter, or knows more about the law or your own case than he feels he does.